his Work It has always been cited under his Name and is attributed to him in all the Manuscripts This Discourse was spoken by St. Ambrose after his Sermons upon the Lives of Abraham Isaac and Jacob towards the Year 387. The Opinions of Criticks are very much divided concerning the Author of the Book of the Sacraments The Benedictines produce in their Preface what has been said upon this Subject and after having given a very Wise and Equitable Judgment about the different Opinions they give their own Thoughts of it and build their Judgment upon good Reason First of all they observe That 't is indifferent to the Members of the Church of Rome to whom this Work be attributed since St. Ambrose teaches the same Doctrine in his Treatise of Mysteries and so tho' it were supposed with Aubertine that the Author of the Book about the Sacraments is of the Seventh Age or with Dailleé that he is of the Eighth the Cause of the Church would be so much the stronger because it would have two different Testimonies of the Judgment of the Church and in different Ages viz. St. Ambrose in the Fourth Age and this Author in the Seventh or Eighth Tho' this were not so and the Church might draw some Advantage from supposing that St. Ambrose was the Author of the Book about the Sacraments yet if it should appear that the contrary Opinion is more probable we must undoubtedly follow it We must judge of these kind of Matters without Prejudice and Affection and we must not consider what would be most advantageous to our selves but what comes nearest to the Truth This is what the Benedictines do they profess to Examine this Question with all possible sincerity as if it had never been canvassed before and without addicting themselves to the Prejudices of any Party They immediately disapprove the Reproaches which the Protestant Criticks have thrown upon this Author they cannot endure that they should make him pass for an Ignorant and Ridiculous Person for an Impostor and a Liar They vindicate him from some Mistakes and Absurdities which Cook Rivet and Daileé had fasten'd upon him They shew That this Expression For this cause at Rome the Name of the Faithful is given to the baptiz'd is not so ridiculous as these Criticks imagine because tho' it were true that the baptiz'd were call'd by the same Name in other Churches yet it were no unprofitable Observation that in the Church of Rome they were call'd so also They observe That some Manuscripts have Rectè instead of Romae but they do not think that we are obliged to follow this Correction They show also That the manner wherein this Author relates the last Words of the Pater Noster Ne patiaris nos induci in tentationem instead of Ne nos inducas in tentationem that this manner I say of ending the Lord's Prayer was not peculiar to him and that St. Cyprian read and repeated thus the last Words of the Lord's Prayer Lastly They defend him against the Accusations of Barbarism of false Subtilty of vain Allegories which are charg'd upon him by the Criticks whom we have mentioned After this the Benedictines produce the Reasons which are alledg'd by Catholick Authors to show that the Books of the Sacraments were St. Ambrose's and at the same time prove that they are not very convincing The First is drawn from the Authority of many ancient Manuscripts where this Treatise is found under the Name of St. Ambrose To these is added the Authority of all the Editions which have been made of it and the Testimony of a great number of Authors of the Ninth Age and those that followed it viz. of Hincmarus Bishop of Rheims of Deoduinus of Liege of Paschasius Ratbertus of Ratramnus a Monk of Corbie of Florus a Deacon of the Church of Lyons of Lanfranc of Berengarius of Algerus of Guitmondus of Durandus Troarnensis of Ivo Carnutensis of Gratian of the Master of the Sentences and of other later Authors who have all cited the Book of the Sacraments under the Name of St. Ambrose This Argument appears plausible enough yet the Benedictine Fathers maintain that it is not fully convincing For how often has it happened say they that Books have been and every Day are taken from those Authors under whose Names they had always passed It is not very well known that the greatest part of those who cited the Works of the Fathers in the latter Ages did not carefully examine whether the Books which they cited were theirs but trusted to the common Title of them As to the Manuscripts the Benedictines assure us that the most ancient have not the Name of the Author and that it is probable the Name of St. Ambrose was added in those which are more Modern either because it was known that St. Ambrose had treated of this Subject or because these Books were found together with that about the Mysteries which treats of the same matter and the first bearing the Name of St. Ambrose whose it was indeed they thought that the last were this Father 's also The Second Proof which is alledg'd to show That the Books of the Sacraments are St. Ambrose's is taken from the Agreement of the Stile of this Work with that of the Book of Mysteries The Benedictines say That 't is true this Author does so imitate St. Ambrose that he Copies out the same which he had said but they observe that in Copying it out he corrupts it and accommodates it to his own Stile which is much below that of St. Ambrose Wherefore this Argument is more proper to raise a doubt whether these Books of the Sacraments be St. Ambrose's or no than to confirm them in the Possession of the Title which they bear The Third Argument produces also the same Effect 'T is said that St. Austin affirms That St. Ambrose wrote a Book about the Sacraments but 't is evident that the Book which St. Austin cites under this Title had quite another Subject than this Book It was a Book of Philosophy against the Platonists as appears by what this Father says of it in the Second Book against Julian Ch. 5. and in the Second of his Retractations Ch. 4 The Benedictines produce also some places drawn out of this Book which are thought to agree to St. Ambrose as the Complaint which he made that he had not a strong Voice and the Explication of the Lord's Prayer which St. Ambrose probably would not have omitted in his other Treatises but that it was in this but at the same time they shew how weak these Arguments are After having thus discuss'd what is said on both sides about the Author of these Books they endeavour to discover him by the Work it self and for that end they enquire into these three Things what Rank he held in the Church at what time he lived and of what Country he was As to the First Point they say That it plainly appears he was a Bishop
heard from the Deacon Demetrius the things which were charg'd upon Hadrian altho this Deacon deny'd it so stifly that he could not be made to confess it by putting him to the Torture Hadrian had recourse to St. Gregory who null'd the proceedings at Larissa and those of the Bishop of the first 〈◊〉 as contrary to the Laws and the Canons and as null in themselves even tho there had not been any Appeal He cuts off the Bishop of Justinâ—… from Comâ—… for thirty days threatens to Excommunicate him of Larissa takes from him all his Jurisdiction over the Bishop of Thebes orders him to restore the Effects of the Church of Thebes and remits the Cause in his own right only to his Residents at Constantinople B. 2. Ind. 11. Ep. 6. 7. He believed also that the Holy See could call Causes of great Consequence to Rome and judge them Thus he judged and acquirred at Rome John a Priest of Chalcedon who was accused of Heresie and condemned by the Bishop of Constantinople B. 5. Ep. 15 16. And he alledges this Example to prove to the Bishop of 〈◊〉 thâ—… he could examin and judge at Rome the Cause of Claudus the Abbot who had a Difference with the Church of Ravenna B 5. Ep. 24. He acquits also a Priest of Isauria who was accused of Heresie B. 5. Ep 64. But he rarely made use of his Jurisdiction And the Metropolitans 〈◊〉 it with him Paul a Bishop of Afric came to Rome to purge himself Witnesses are sent thither who are 〈◊〉 insufficient Paul desires to be sent back to Constantinople the Pope allows him to go thither with two Bishops B. 6. Ep. 2. As to the ordinary Causes between the 〈◊〉 Clergy of the Bishopricks depending upon the Metropolis of Rome he left them to the Decision of the Bishops and would not have his Wardens to meddle in them nor to diminish the Jurisdiction of the Ordinary For says he if we do not preserve the Jurisdiction of each Bishop we 〈◊〉 the Order of the Church which we should maintain Nam si unicuique Episeâ—… sua jurisdictio non 〈◊〉 quid aliuâ— agitur nisi ut per nos per quos Ecclesiasticus ordo custoâ—… debuit 〈◊〉 B. 9. Ep. 32. Yet he punish'd a Priest of a Parish in the Diocese of another Bishop B. 2. Ep. 16. As to the Informations about the Disorders committed in the Person of a Bishop he observes that they should be made by a Clergy-man together with the Judge B. 2 Ind. 11. Ep. 1. He would not have a Bishop detained a long time in Prison He says that he must be Deposed if he be guilty or set at Liberty if he be innocent B. 1. Ep. 32. The Custom for a Man to purge himself by Oath when there was no Conviction of him was in use in the time of St. Gregory which he approves and makes use of B. 2. Ep. 23. B. 9. Ep. 12. Against the Title of Universal Patriarch ST Gregory does not only oppose this Title in the Patriarch of Constantinople but he maintains also that it cannot agree to any other Bishop and that the Bishop of Rome neither ought nor can assume it John the younger Patriarch of Constantinople had taken upon him this Title in a Council held in 586 in the time of Pope Pelagius which oblig'd this Pope to null the Acts of this Council St. Gregory wrote of it also to this Patriarch but this made no impression on him and John would not abandon this fine Title B. 4. Ep. 36. St. Gregory address'd himself to the Emperor Mauritius and exhorted him earnestly to employ his Authority for redressing this Abuse and to force him who assumed this Title to quit it He remonstrates to him in his Letter That although Jesus Christ had committed to St. Peter the Care of all his Church yet he was not called Universal Apostle That the Title of Universal Bishop is against the Rules of the Gospel and the Appointment of the Canons that there cannot be an Universal Bishop but the Authority of all the other will be destroy'd or diminish'd That if the Bishop of Constantinople were Universal Bishop and it should happen that he should fall into Heresie it might be said that the Universal Church was fall'n into destruction That the Council of Chalcedon had offer'd this Title to St. Leo but neither he nor his Successors would accept it lest by giving something peculiar to one Bishop only they should take away the Rights which belong to all the Bishops That it belongs to the Emperor to reduce by his Authority him who despises the Canons and does injury to the Universal Church by assuming this singular Name B. 4. Ep. 32. These Remonstrances had no effect for the Emperor would not meddle in this Affair and had even authorized John the younger and therefore the Pope complain'd of it to the Empress Ep. 34. of the same Book He wrote also to other Patriarchs who were it seems concern'd to oppose this new Title But they did not take the Matter so heinously as St. Gregory and suffer'd the Patriarch of Constantinople to enjoy this Title which did them no prejudice Nay Anastasius the Patriarch of Antioch had the boldness to remonstrate to St. Gregory that he must not be angry for a Matter of so little consequence But St. Gregory gave him to understand that he did not take the Matter to be so Cyriacus succeeding to John in the See of Constantinople continued to assume the same Title yet he wrote to St. Gregory immediately after his Promotion This Pope would not refuse his Letter but he gave him notice that he should quit that Ambitious Title of Universal Patriarch if he would prevent a Rupture between them and wrote to the Emperor that his Legat should not Communicate with Cyriacus till he had parted with this vain Title B. 6. Ep. 4. 5. 23 24 25 28 30 31. He exhorts the Bishop of Thessalonica not to approve this Title B. 7. Ind. 2. Ep. 70. Yet Cyriacus would not quit it and St. Gregory was also oblig'd to write to him about the end of his Pontificat B. 11. Ep. 43. Of the Rights and Authority of the Metropolitans ST Gregory desires that in Afric a Primate should be chosen rather with respect to his Merit then the Dignity of the See and that he should recide in a City B. 1. Ep. 72. Yet he permits the Bishops of Numidia to observe their ancient Customs even as to the appointing of Primates provided notwithstanding that they suffer none who have been Donatists to ascend to that Dignity B. 11. Ep. 75. St. Gregory in naming his Deputies preserves the Rights of Metropolitans Singulis quibusaue Metropolitis secundum priscam consuetudinem proprio bonore servato B. 4. Ep. 50. i. e. Saving to each Metropolitan his peculiar honour according to ancient Custom About the Pallium ST Gregory sent the Pallium to many Bishops To Anastasius of Antioch B. 1. Ep.
things are spoken in his Treatise De Divinis Officiis which is Printed at Mentz 1549 at Paris 1610 and in Biblioth Patr. Tom. 15. Other small Treatises of his are extant in Surius Canisius Antiq. Lection Tom. 6. Biblioth Patr. Tom. 15. After this time I do not find that there was any Contest in the West about the Use and Worship of Images which henceforward became common in France Germany and other Places Let us now speak of the Authors chiefly engaged in this Controversy Nicephorus was but a Layman when he was chosen Patriarch of Constantinople in 806 after the Nicephorus Patriarch of Constantinople Death of Tarasius He had passed some part of his life at Court but had been for some time before his Election retired from the World yet was no Monk He was no sooner in possession of the Patriarchal Dignity but through complaisance to the Emperor Nicephorus he restored in a Council Joseph the Steward who had Crowned Theodota whom Copronymus had Married having Divorced his lawful Wife Theodorus Studita and Plato violently opposed this Act whereupon the Patriarch held a Council in 809 in which Joseph was not only confirmed in his place but the second Marriage of Constantine was declared lawful by Dispensation and every one that should maintain the contrary was Anathematized This Decision raised a great Quarrel between Nice-phorus and Theodorus who together with several Monks separated themselves from his Communion and treated him as an Heretick which Division continued till the Death of Nicephorus the Emperor But the Emperor Michael put an end to this Schism and made them Friends upon condition that Joseph should be displaced and that the Monks for the future should obey the Patriarch in all things that were not manifestly contrary to the Faith and Law of God From this time Nicephorus and Theodorus Studita were perfectly good friends and suffered Persecution together for the Worship of Images Nicephorus was driven out of his Church and banished in 814 by the Authority of Leo Armeniacus and although under the Emperor Michael Balbus many that were banished had liberty to return yet he was allowed that favour but remain 14 years in banishment in which he died in 828. The Works which he hath left us are these that follow The first is a Letter written in 811 to Pope Leo III. which contains a long Confession of Faith Baronius hath Printed it in Latin in his Annals and 't is also Printed in Greek with the Acts of the Council of Nice and in Greek and Latin in Zonoras and in the Collection of the Councels In it Nicephorus speaks of himself with much humility and abasement He says that having passed the former part of his life at Court and in Worldly Affairs he had retreated into solitude out of which he was drawn against his Will and made Patriarch of Constantinople that finding himself burdened with the Weight of so great a Charge he begged the Prayers of the Bishop of Rome and all the Faithful of his Church He commends the Piety and Faith of the Church of Rome but adds that New Rome was not at all inferior to Old in the purity of her Faith To make proof of this Assertion he joins a Confession of Faith to his Letter in which after he hath explained the Mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation and acknowledged the Invocation and Intercession of Saints and Worship of Images he declares that he receives the 7 first Councils and the Doctrine of the Fathers After this he excuses himself to the Pope that he did not write to him sooner and says that the cause was that he was made to believe that the Church of Rome was at Enmity with that of Constantinople but now the cause of the Division being removed he doubted not but there would be a perfect agreement between the two Churches In the conclusion he recommends to the Pope Michael the Archbishop of Philadelphia who carried this Letter and some Presents with it This Letter is extant in Greek and Latine at Heidelberg 1591 put out by Cornelius and with Zonoras at Paris 1620. Nicephorus's Abridgment of History is his most considerable Work it begins at the Death of the Emperor Mauritius and ends with the Reign of the Empress Irene ad an 769. It hath been published in Greek and Latine by Petavius and Printed in Latine and Greek in Octavo in 1616 and since put into the Bizantine History Tom. 1. It hath been since put out with Theoph. Simoccitta's History Paris 1648. Some attribute to him also a Chronology which was heretofore Translated by Anastatius Bibliothecarius into Latine and inserted into his History it contains a Catalogue of all the Patriarchs Kings and Princes of the Jews Kings of Persia and Macedon Roman Emperors according to the Order of their Successors the Years of their Lives and Reigns the Names of some of the Empresses Kings of Israel and Jewish High-Priests the Names and Years of the Patriarchs of the Churches of Jerusalem Rome Constantinople Alexandria and Antioch This Work is very defective if it be Nicephorus's some other Person hath added the Names of some of the Emperors and some Patriarchs which lived after his Death At first there appeared only a Translation attributed to Anastasius afterward Camerarius made another Version upon which Contius a Lawyer at Bruges made a Comment Scaliger Printed it in Greek at the end of his Edition of Eusebius's Chronicon or Thesaurus Temporum and last of all F. Goar Printed them in Greek and Latin at Paris 1652 with Sycellus's Chronicon At the beginning of this Work is prefixed a Book Entituled Schometria which contains a Catalogue of Canonical Ecclesiastical and Apocryphal Books but 't is not certain that it is the Work of this Patriarch our Learned Bishop of Chester Dr. Pearson proves that 't is not Nicephorus's but some other Authors coeval with him in his Vind. Ignat. p. 1. He made also four Treatises against the Iconoclasts of which we have only a Latin Version composed by Turrian which is extant in Canisius's Collection Tom. 4. p. 253. and in the Biblioth Patrion Tom. 14. In the first he supposes the Iconoclasts to have wrong Sentiments of the Incarnation from whence he concludes that they are justly condemned because they have not followed universally the Doctrine of the General Councils because they have demolished the Temples beat down the Images and treated them as Idolaters which worship them insomuch that they have been the cause of the effusion of much Christian Blood and lastly because they have separated themselves from the Church In the 2d Tract he endeavours to prove by 10 Reasons that the Image of Jesus Christ ought to have more respect than the Cross. In the 3d Book he proves the Worship of Images by the Example of the Cherubims over the Ark. In the last he shews that the Image of Jesus Christ may be formed and painted because according to his Humane Nature he is bounded
Infidels Proud and the Saracens Powerful He concludes all with the third Passeover which is the passing to Glory where he Prays he may one Day meet with them He Preach'd likewise another Sermon to the Fathers of the Council which is only a Moral Exhortation Afterwards he Orders the Reading in a full Council the Chapters or Canons upon the Discipline of the Church which were already drawn up Matthew Paris saies That those Canons seem'd tolerable to some of the Prelates but grievous to others His Words are these Facto prius ab ipso Papa exhortationis Sermone recitata sunt in pleno Concilio Capitula Septuaginta quae aliis placabilia aliis videbantur onerosa Let the Case be how it will 't is certain That these Canons were not made by the Council but by Innocent III. who presented them to the Council ready drawn up and order'd them to be Read and that the Prelates did not enter into any Debate upon them but that their Silence was taken for an Approbation These Seventy Chapters or Canons begin with a Form of Faith drawn up in these Terms We do firmly Believe and sincerely Confess That there is but One True Eternal Immense Omnipotent Immutable Incomprehensible Ineffable God the Father Son and Holy Ghost who are Three Persons but only One Essence One Substance and One Simple Nature The Father derives his Substance from none the Son has it from the Father and the Holy Ghost proceeds from Both without Beginning and without End The Father begets the Son is begotten and the Holy Ghost proceeds They are Consubstantial and Co-equal in all things equally Powerful equally Eternal One Individual Principle of all things the Creator of things Visible and Invisible Spiritual and Corporeal who by His Omnipotent Power Created out of Nothing at the Beginning of Time and all together two sorts of Creatures Spiritual and Corporeal and afterwards the Humane Nature which is a Compound of Soul and Body For the Devil and the other Daemons were Good when God Created them and became by their own fault Wicked and Man Sinned and Fell by the suggestion of the Devil This Holy Trinity which is Indivisible with respect to its Essence and distinguish'd according to its Personal Properties has given to Mankind a Salutary Doctrine by the Ministery of Moses the Prophets and the other Servants of God according to the Order and Disposition of Times And at last Jesus Christ the onely Son of God who was Incarnate by the Power of the whole Trinity and Conceived of the Virgin Mary always a Virgin by the Power of the Holy Ghost who was true Man made up of a reasonable Soul and humane Body one single Person compounded of two Natures has more clearly shown us the Way of Life who being Immortal and Impassible as to his Divinity as to his Humanity became Passible and Mortal And he suffer'd for the Salvation of Mankind on the Cross he Dy'd and Descended into Hell is Risen from the Dead and Ascended up into Heaven but he Descended in his Soul and Rose again with his Body and is Ascended into Heaven with his Body and Soul and shall come again at the End of the World to Judge both the Living and the Dead and to give to all Men according to their Works as well the Reprobates as the Elect who shall all rise again with their own Bodies which they at present bear about them that so they may receive according to their Deserts whether they be Good or Bad the latter Eternal Glory with Jesus Christ and the former Eternal Damnation with the Devil There is but one Catholick Church of the Faithful out of which none is Saved wherein Jesus Christ is both Priest and Sacrifice whose Body and Blood are contain'd really in the Sacrament of the Altar under the Species of Bread and Wine the Bread being Transubstantiated into the Body of Jesus Christ and the Wine into his Blood by the Power of God that so to render the Mystery of the Unity perfect we might receive of His Nature what he receiv'd of Ours No Person may Consecrate the Sacrament but the Priest who has receiv'd Lawful Ordination by the power of the Keys of the Church which Jesus Christ has given to his Apostles and their Successors The Sacrament of Baptism which is Consecrated by Invocation of the Trinity Father Son and Holy Ghost on the Water is the Cause of Salvation as well of Infants as of Adult Persons when 't is Conferr'd according to the Form of the Church whoever it be that Administers it If any one falls into Sin after Baptism he may be always restor'd to Grace by a true Repentance Not only Virgins and those who live Continently but also Marry'd Persons who please God by their Faith and Good Life merit Eternal Life This is the Abstract of the Doctrine of the Church contain'd in the Profession of Faith of this Council Which is the first Chapter or Canon of it In consequence to this the Council condemns in the Second Chapter the Treatise Compos'd by the Abbot Joachim against Peter Lombard about the Unity of the Essence of the Trinity because that Abbot had treated him as a Fool and an Heretick for having said in his Book of Sentences That the Father Son and Holy Ghost are one Supreme or Soveraign Being which is neither begetting begotten nor proceeding A Proposition from whence he pretends it follows That there is a Quaternity in the Godhead namely Three Persons of the Trinity and one common Essence The Council explains and confirms the Doctrine of the Master of the Sentences and rejects that of Joachim who pretended That the Father Son and Holy Ghost where not the same thing tho' they be one Substance and one Nature which yet he explain'd in such a manner that he seem'd to admit of only a Specifick Unity or resemblance between those Three Persons The Council declar'd those to be Hereticks who would maintain the Opinion of the Abbot Joachim However they order'd That the Condemnation should be no prejudice to the Monastery of Flora of which Abbot Joachim was the Founder because there they liv'd Regularly and put in practice a very good Discipline but especilly because that Abbot had submitted his Books to the judgment of the Holy See and had protested in Writing That his Belief was the same with that of the Church of Rome which is the Mother and Mistress of all the Faithful The Council likewise condemn'd in the same Chapter the Errors of Amaury of whom 't is said That the Father of Lies had so obscur'd his Understanding that his Doctrine may rather pass for Nonsense than Heresie In the Third Canon they Excommunicated and Anathematiz'd all the Hereticks who oppose the Catholick and Orthodox Faith as before Explain'd And 't is therein Order'd That the Hereticks shall be deliver'd up after their Condemnation to the Secular Powers or to their Officers to be Punish'd according to their Demerits the Clerks being
whether he should let him stay in the Church that it was below the Divine Majesty the Evangelical Discipline and the honour of the Church to permit a Man that exercised so infamous a Profession to be in her Communion That if the Law forbid Men to put on Female Habits it certainly foâ— bad them much more to Personate the Gestures and Postures of Women and to represent unseemly and lascivious Actions That though this Actor had forborn to appear on the Stage himself yet he was no less Criminal in teaching his scandalous Art to others That if he pretended in his own excuse that he was Indigent and had no other way left him to maintain himself he should be relieved as the other Poor belonging to the Church were provided he would be content with that little Subsistence the Church allowed him and did not believe that this was given him by way of recompence for sinning no more since he alone reaped the benefit of it The third which is the Sixty fifth in Pamelius's Order was writ to Rogatianus against one of his Deacons who forgetting the respect he owed to his own Bishop had treated him after an undutiful manner St. Cyprian and his Brethren to whom this Bishop had writ about the Matter answered him that he might have punished him immediately for his Boldness if he had been so pleased and that his writing to him about it was only an Effect of his Humility They enlarge upon the Respect and Obedience that is due to Bishops affirming that the Original of all Schisms and Heresies proceeded from the Contempt that was shewn to them At last they advised this Bishop in case his Deacon still continued to provoke him with new Injuries to make use of his Episcopal Authority and to Excommunicate him together with the other who had joyned himself with him hoping nevertheless that he would give him full Satisfaction Because say they we had rather overcome the Evils we receive by Patience than revenge our selves by the Sacerdotal Power The Fourth Letter which is the Sixty second in Pamelius's Edition was writ in the Name of a Council to Pomponius a Bishop who had consulted St. Cyprian's Advice about some Virgins who having made a Resolution to keep their Virginity had been too familiar with some Persons and particularly with a Deacon He commends this Bishop for depriving the Deacon and the rest that had lived with them of the Communion As for what concerned the Case of the Virgins it was ordained that those who had lost their Virginity should do publick Penance for their Crimes a considerable time as being Adulteresses in respect of Jesus Christ their Spouse and that if they would not quit the Company of those Persons with whom they had maintained this criminal Correspondence they should be for ever turned out of the Church without hopes of Pardon and Salvation since it is impossible to be saved out of the bosom of the Church And then as for those who had not lost their Virginity he judged it expedient to admit them to the Communion of the Church but with this warning That if they still continued to live in the same House with those Persons they should be punished after a more severe manner and must no more expect to be pardoned so easily Thus I have briefly run over these four Letters which the Author of the Annals of St. Cyprian has placed at the head of his English Edition and pretends to have been written before any of the rest because St. Cyprian yz St. Cyprian The principal Reason is because he does not speak of any Persecution in his Letters though this reason is not absolutely convincing makes no mention of any Persecution either present or past in them as he does in almost all the rest The Reader ought to consult Mr. Dodwell's Learned Dissertation upon this Letter to â—ompâ—â—ius wherein he will see what gave occasion to those Virgins to live in so Scandalous a manner with the Deacons fully explained There remains nothing now but the 63 Letter which the Author of the Annals in the English Edition aa Pretends to have been written in the Year 253. Because it appears that St. Cyprian was then a Bishop Cum mediocritatem nostram sâ—â—peâ— hoâ—il◠〈◊〉 moderatime teâ—eamus Besides that there he speaks of the Persecution and says that this was the cause why some of the Faithful abstained from offering Wine This rather as I intimated above was the true Reason of this Innovation affirms to have been written in the year 253 in the time of the Persecution under Gallus and Volusian It is addressed to Caecilius and condemns the Error or rather the Abuse of some Priests who offered only Water in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass. He confronts this ill Custom which was introduced in some places with the example and precept of Jesus Christ and shews that we ought to offer in the Chalice nothing but Wine mingled with Water He speaks of this after such a manner as may encline us to believe that it was absolutely necessary in his Opinion to mingle Water with the Wine for he tells us that as the Body of Jesus Christ could not be only of Meal unless it were tempered with Water so likewise the Blood of Jesus Christ could not be of Wine alone if it is not mingled with Water But besides that in the Explication of these Words we may understand them of the Body of Jesus Christ taken in a Mystical sense we ought not to wonder that the Fathers speak often thus of Customs established in their own time when they are Ancient such as this is which came from the example of Jesus Christ and the Tradition of the Apostles we are not at all to wonder I say if they speak of them as of necessary things without scrupulously examining whether they are of absolute necessity taking them in the rigorous sense He observes in this Letter that they used in his time to Celebrate the Sacrifice of the Mass in the Morning and that Baptism was a necessary preparation for the Eucharist He speaks of this Sacrament in such terms as plainly shews that he believed it really contained the Body and Blood of Jesus Christ and yet he lays down several Mystical Reasons to explain why they made use of Bread and Wine mingled with Water He tells us that Jesus Christ is figuratively represented by the Wine and that the Water which is mingled with it signifies the Union of the People with Jesus Christ. Upon these grounds it is that he says that if we offered pure Wine the Body of Jesus Christ would be without us and that if we offered only Water we should be without Jesus Christ And lastly That as several grains of Corn ground and kneaded together make one Loaf so after the same manner we are one and the same Body in Jesus Christ who is that Coelestial Bread See here the power of Prejudice The extract which M. Du Pin
Verona who lived under Constantius and Julian because they are borrowed out of other Authors There are Four Sermons of them that are a Intirely St. Basil ' s. The Sermons of S. Basil upon these Words Attende tibi de Livore Invidia are entirely stoln and the two other Homilies about Fasting and Temptation are part of the two longest of St. Basil. intirely St. Basil's All the Homilies upon the Psalms are taken word for word out of the Commentaries b Of St. Hilary These Sermons upon the 126 127 128 129 and 130 Psalms belong to St. Hilary Those upon the 49 79 and 100 Psalms might be his also because we have lost the Commentaries of this Father upon the Psalms of St. Hilary which shews That these Sermons attributed to Zeno of Verona are a Collection of Sermons c Stoln out of several Autkors Some of the long ones are taken out of Greek Authors and the short ones out of the Latin Writers and Fragments of Homilies stoln out of several Authors and heaped together without any Choice Some are short others are long some are well written and in an elevated Style others ill and in a mean pitiful one some are clear others obscure In short nothing can be imagined to be more unequal In the Sermon of Continence he reckons more than 400 Years since St. Paul wrote his Epistle to the Corinthians and yet in other Homilies he speaks of Temples Martyrs and Carechumens All these things set it past Dispute that these Sermons attributed to Zeno of Verona and unknown to all Antiquiry are a Collection of Sermons taken out of several Authors of different Times and different Countries put together indiscreetly by some ignorant Copier The same Censure ought in all probability to be passed upon the 18 Sermons cited by Turrianus under the name of Eusebius of Alexandria This Author is unknown to the Ancients neither was there a Bishop of Alexandria d A Bishop of this Name Eusebius indeed Lib. 7. Chap. 11. of his History gives a good Character of one Eusebius a Deacon that lived with Dionysius of Alexandria who was afterwards Bishop of Laodicea but this Man ought rather to call himself Eusebius of Laodicea than Eusebius of Alexandria of this Name for the Three first Ages of the Church Therefore these Sermons belong to a more modern Author ARNOBIUS THough Arnobius and Lactantius lived the better part of their time in the Fourth Century of Arnobius of the Church yet we shall nevertheless joyn them to the Authors of the Third because they wrote with the same Spirit and after the same manner that is to say they did not employ themselves in writing against the Heresies that role in the Fourth Age but only in in confuting the Pagans in Imitation of the Ancients Arnobius was Professor of Rhetorick at Sicca a City of Numidia in Africk a Under the Emperor Dioclesian He wrote his Books toward the end of the Third or the Beginning of the Fourth Century for in his First Book he expresly tells us That it was Three Hundred Years more or less since the Christians began to appear in the World under the Emperour Dioclesian He was first a Pagan but as St. Jerome tells us in Euseb. Chron. being desirous to be converted that he might more easily prevail with the Bishops to admit him amongst the Faithful he composed when he was but a Catechumen Seven Eloquent Books against the Religion he had then left and these Books were as Pledges or Hostages that procured for him the Favour of that Baptism he so earnestly sollicited Now though it must be consessed that he did not perfectly understand the Christian Religion when he wrote these Books in which some Errours are to be sound yet he confuted the Absurdities of Paganism with singular Dexterity and vigorously defended the principal Articles of our Religion He begins his First Book with consuting that Popular Calumny which the Pag ans so industriously advanced against the Christians viz. That they were the Authors of all the Calamities and Miseries that afflicted the World He shews that this is a groundless and unreasonable Fancy that there were Plagues and Famines and Wars before our Saviours appearance and that nothing had been changed since his coming That he was so far from being the Author of their Miseries that on the contrary he brought abundance of Good unto the World That Miseries proceed from Natural Causes and that it often happens that those things which in the common acceptation of Mankind pass for Misfortunes don't prove so in effect That if the Christians were the Cause of these Calamities the World would have had no Interval without them ever since the appearance of Jesus Christ That if the Pagans Deities sent these Miseries to Men for the Punishment of the Christians they were unjust as well as weak That the Christians worship the true God and apprehend no dangers from false ones That they adore Jesus Christ but don't consider him as a Man that suffered Death for his own Transgressions but as a real true God who took the Humane Nature upon him to manifest himself to the World to teach Mankind the ways of Truth and to accomplish all those things for which be appeared upon Earth That he died and afterwards was raised up from the Grave to satisfie all Men that the Hopes of their Salvation were certain He proves the Divinity of Jesus Christ by the Exemplary Holiness of his Life by the Innocence of his Manners by the great number of Miracles and Prodigies that were wought by him and by others that had Commission from him by the Signs that appear'd upon the Earth at his Death and then he shews that we cannot reasonably question the Truth of these things because the Evangelists who have delivered them in writing were Persons of great Integrity and Simplicity That there is no reason to imagine they were so Vain or indeed so Mad as to pretend they saw those things that they never did see especially since they were so far from reaping any Advantages from such Inventions that they thereby exposed themselves to the Hatred of all the World In his Second Book he demonstrates that Jesus Christ was wrongfully Persecuted since he had done nothing to deserve the hatred of any one since he was no Tyrant and destroy'd no body since he acquired no Riches for himself and did no manner of Injustice to the meanest Person He likewise shows that the Pagans had no certain Principles whereby to judge which was the true or false Religion that they were very much in the wrong for laughing at the Credulity of the Christians since in the generality of things that have a relation to Humane Life Men usually manage themselves by the belief which they repose in particular Persons That Jesus Christ merited a great deal more than all the Philosophers in the World because of the Miracles which he wrought That the Pagan
This sort of Books which contain the Lives of Authors are pleasant when they are written of Great Men who had a share in the Management of Affairs or of such Persons whose Lives were full of extraordinary and surprizing Accidents and they are useful when they are written of Persons of great Vertue and Merit But when no such thing is to be found in them they are commonly tedious and useless Books 'T is probable that this Life of Aquilius was fill'd with Extraordinary Occurrences which was the reason why he wrote it and why he gave it the Title of The Catastrophe or the Experiment Wherein he probably gives us cause to admire the Providence of God in the wonderful Changes that happen'd to himself This is all that we can say by Conjecture having no certain Knowledge of this Matter EUZOIUS EUZOIUS was the Scholar of Thespesius the Rhetorician together with St. Gregory Nazianzen He Studied in his Youth at Caesarea in Palaestine whereof he was afterward Bishop He Euzoius repaired the Library of Origen and Pamphilus causing the Books to be written out upon new Skins because the old ones began to rot He was at last turn'd out of the Church in the time of Theodosius He wrote many Treatises which were easie to be known in St. Jerom's time This is what this Father has told us of this Author St. Epiphanius speaks of him in Haeres 73. and places him among those Bishops that were purely Arian And yet he is different from the famous Arian Euzoïus Bishop of Antioch St. CYRIL of Jerusalem ST CYRIL was ordain'd Priest of the Church of Jerusalem by Maximus Bishop of that City but if we believe St. Jerom he would not do the Office of a Deacon as long as that Bishop liv'd St. Cyril of Jerusalem After his Death a After his Death Socrates B. II. Ch. 30. and Sozomen B. IV. Ch. 19. says That Acacius of Caesarea and Patrophilus of Scythopolis turned out Maximus to place St. Cyril in his room But St. Jerom who speaks of St. Cyril after such a manner as sufficiently discovers that he did not favour him since he treats him as an Arian tells us That Maximus was dead when he was Ordain'd But he accuses St. Cyril of persecuting Heraclius who was Ordain'd Bishop by the Catholicks in the room of Maximus and of reducing him to the rank of Presbyters St. Epiphanius Ruffinus and Theodoret speak not a word of this Heraclius But Socrates and Sozomen place him as second of the Bishops whom the Arians set up in Opposition to St. Cyril St. Jerom calls the first Irenaeus instead of Eremius he was plac'd in his room by Acacius and the Bishops of his Party which render'd his Faith suspected to the Catholicks b His Faith suspected to the Catholicks Ruffinus and St. Jerom observe That he oftentimes chang'd his Faith and his Communion As to his Communion 't is true for at first he held Communion with Acacius afterwards he separated from him then he communicated with the Bishops of his Party at the Synod of Melitina after this he forsook them to joyn with Basil of Ancyra and the Semi-Arians at last he re-united himself to the Catholicks But for all this he did not change his Faith for he always believed the Son to be like in Substance unto the Father without condemning the Term Consubstantial 'T was Acacius who was so changeable in his Faith for he sometimes signed the Doctrine the Words being like in Substance and sometimes condemned this Doctrine and approved the Error of the Anomaeans but Meletius re-united them all and made them approve the Term Consubstantial We must not believe St. Jerom about the Cause of St. Cyril for he was addicted to Paulinus against Meletius and against all those of his Party But he was not long a Friend to Acacius for the Differences which they had about the Prerogatives of their Sees quickly broke them in pieces The Council of Nice had given the Bishop of Jerusalem the first place among all the Bishops of that Province and yet left the Rites of the Church of Caesarea entire which was Metropolis to the Church of Jerusalem This Honour gave occasion to the Bishop of Jerusalem to assume to himself some Privileges and so Maximus of Jerusalem took upon him to Ordain Bishops in Palaestine and to Assemble a Council of that Province His Successor St. Cyril desiring to maintain himself in the Possession of those Privileges was troubled by Acacius of Caesarea who would not endure that the Church of Jerusalem should assume to it self a right which legally pertain'd to his own Church To revenge himself for this Encroachment he call'd a Council in the Year 356 wherein he depos'd St. Cyril under pretence that he had Sold the Ornaments of the Church and the Sacred Vessels to relieve the Poor in time of Famine He plac'd in his room Eutychius who probably was Bishop of Eleutheropolis St. Cyril appealed from the Sentence of this Synod to a more numerous Council but he was forced to retire to Tarsus where he continued some time with Silvanus Bishop of that City who received him very kindly and gave him leave to celebrate the Holy Mysteries and to Preach in his Diocess At this time there was a Synod held at Melitina compos'd of Bishops of Acacius's Party where St. Cyril was present He came afterwards to the Council of Seleucia wherein he took part with Basil of Ancyra Eustathius Sebastus and the other Semi-Arian Bishops who treated him as a lawful Bishop and gave him a Seat in the Council in spite of all the Opposition that was made by Acacius And Acacius that he might the better Oppose his Adversary threw himself upon the Party of Eudoxus and by this means got St. Cyril depos'd anew in the Council of Constantinople 'T was about this time that Heremius was ordain'd Bishop of Jerusalem because probably Eutychius who was already Bishop of Eleutheropolis would not leave his Church to take the See of Jerusalem After Heremius there was one named Heraclius and to him Succeeded one Hilarius But at last St. Cyril was restored to his See under the Emperour Theodosius after his Ordination had been approved by the Council of Constantinople held in the Year 380 c The Council of Constantinople held in the Year 380. This appears by the Letter from the Council of Constantinople produced by Theodoret wherein the Bishops declare That they had approved the Ordination of St. Cyril because it was performed according to form by the Bishops of his Province He died in the Year 386 and had John for his Successor St. Jerom assures us That St. Cyril compos'd his Catechetical Discourses in his Youth We have 18 of them extant address'd to the Catechumens whereof some are quoted by Theodoret d By Theodoret c. This Father in his Second Dialogue cites a long Passage taken out of the 4th Catechetical Discourse of St. Cyril Bishop
before If ye are Poor lend your Money upon Interest to God who is Rich. Afterwards he represents the Misery and Pain of Hunger and describes in a most moving manner the Extremity of a Man languishing for want of Food to beget the greater horror of the Cruelty and Barbarity of Covetous Rich Men who suffer their Brethren to die for Hunger when they are able to assist them He observes That in a time of publick Necessity especially we must give considerable Alms and that we must expiate our Sins by Charity to the Poor At last he admonishes the Poor not to throw themselves into Despair but to put their Trust in the Mercy of God who has sometimes plentifully fed the Just after an extraordinary manner He exhorts them to suffer with Patience like Job to consider their Misery as the Trial of their Vertue to give thanks to God to bestow something to the Poor even of their Necessaries assuring them that this is the way to procure the Multiplication of their Loaves as God did formerly Multiply the Cruise of Meal to the Widow of Sarepta To these three Sermons may be joyn'd the Homily wherein he proves That we must not set our Hearts upon the Riches and Pleasures of this World There he shews That the only Care which we ought to be concern'd for is that of our Souls That we ought to rid our Minds of the Love of Riches and give bountifully to the Poor After this he describes a Fire which it was feared might have burnt down the City He conjures those that escaped this great Calamity to relieve those that suffered and exhorts these last to Patience by the Example of Job whose History he explains The 10th Homily is against Anger where First he excites a horror of this Passion by giving a Description of its mischievous Effects and then he shews That we can have no just Excuse for this Passion of Anger by showing that all the Pretences which are alledg'd for it are false The First is an Injury which we may think we have received But St. Basil shews That we ought not to render Injury for Injury and that we must not imitate our Enemy nor follow his Footsteps and Example He adds That whatsoever Outrage has been done to us we need do no more but remember that we are Dust and shall return to Dust to convince us that we have deserved all sorts of Reproaches and Disgraces That by showing Meekness we revenge our selves of our Enemies that we acquire the Glory of being Mild and Patient and that Silence upon this Occasion deserves the Rewards of Heaven Reproaches are another Cause of Anger But St. Basil shows That even this is ill-grounded because these Reproaches are either True or False if they are True we are to blame if we trouble our selves for them if they are false our Anger for them gives Cause to suspect that they are true But he call'd me Poor says one If that be true says St. Basil bear with it if it be false What does it concern you 'T is no shame to be Poor for you came naked into the VVorld and Jesus Christ being Rich would appear Poor in it He treated me as a Fool and an Ignorant Fellow will another say Yet many more reproachful VVords were spoken of Jesus Christ. But yet How can we forbear being angry when we are abus'd and buffetted when we are beaten and torn in pieces VVill others say Jesus Christ did also suffer more than all this answers St. Basil. Lastly St. Basil prescribes Rules to avoid Anger as not to think more highly of our selves than others to hearken with a Philosophical Temper to the Discourses of a Man that is truly angry with Sin with the Devil with Error with the Enemies of God to practise Humility and consider the Miseries of Men. He concludes with some New Reasons to dissuade Men from Anger The 11th Homily is against Envy In the First Part he reckons up the Reasons which may inspire a Man with hatred of this Vice He says That 't is a Vice proper to the Devil which gnaws and consumes him in whom it is found tho' he receives no Profit by it and which is always accompanied with Melancholy and Vexation of Spirit and that an Envious Man is the unhappiest Man in the VVorld Lastly He describes all the troublesome Consequences and miserable Effects of Envy and he says That the best way to Cure this Vice is to have no great Esteem of the things of this VVorld to despise its perishable Goods and to place all our Happiness in the Hope of a Future Life to believe that nothing but Vertue is a solid and true Good and to desire nothing else The 14th Homily is against Drunkenness It was compos'd upon the occasion of a Disorder which happen'd upon Easter-Eve Probably there had been at that time some profane Recreations the Men and VVomen without any Reverence for the Vigils of so Holy a Festival had made Feasts and the VVomen had assembled and were come to Dance and Sing even to places where the Bodies of the Martyrs were kept St. Basil having seen this Disorder was sensibly touched as he says of himself at the beginning of his Discourse That after so many Exhortations after seven Weeks Fasting after being present so many times at the Service of the Church and the Sermons during the time of Lent they had destroy'd in one Day the Fruit of all his Labours He says That he knew not whether he should hold his Peace or whether he should speak That he should have held his Peace but that he fear'd the Chastisement of Jeremy for having refus'd to Preach to an Unbelieving and Rebellious People That Drunkenness was the source of this Disorder and that he must now Preach against this Vice This is in Effect the Subject of this Homily wherein he possesses Men's Minds with a great horror of this Crime and describes the pernicious Effects of it Towards the end of it he returns to the excesses of the preceding Day He cries out against their Songs and Dances against their immoderate Laughter against their Apparel which was neither Honest nor Modest and he exhorts those of his Hearers who had been of this Company to Cure themselves of Drunkenness by Fasting to sing Psalms instead of the merry Songs which they had sung to turn their Laughter into Mourning and their Dancing into Kneeling and in short to leave off their Sumptuous and Magnificent Apparel and to put on that which is more agreeable to Modesty and Christian Humility The 22d Homily is of Humility He begins it with observing That Man lost his Dignity by the Sin of Adam and that he cannot recover it but by Humility That the Devil uses all his Endeavours to destroy this Vertue and to deprive us of it by possessing us with a great Esteem of Riches of Honours and the Advantages of Body and Mind But he shews That a Man ought not to Glory
Favour address'd to Cynegius the Praetorian Prefect wherein he testifies his Indignation against the manner of treating them and ordains That the Bishops Gregory of Spain and Heraclides of the East who are mentioned in their Petition and all those who communicate with them be suffered to live in quiet This Petition must have been presented after the Year 383 because Arcadius to whom it is address'd was not admitted a Partner of the Empire till that Year and the Rescript must be before 388 which was the Year wherein Cynegius died It seems to have been presented while Damasus liv'd who died in the Year 384. There is some probability that Faustinus presented the Confession of Faith which goes under his Name in the Roman Code publish'd by Monsieur Quesnel at the End of the Works of St. Leo along with this Petition I know very well that this Learned Man pretends that this Confession of Faith was made about the Year 379 before the Council of Constantinople but his Conjectures are not convincing He attributes to the Priest Marcellinus the Confession of Faith which precedes this in the New Code but this also is a Conjecture that is not absolutely certain The Stile of Faustinus in his Treatise of the Trinity is very plain and simple He contents himself with producing Passages of Scripture from which he draws consequences to prove the Doctrine of the Church and with answering the Objections of the Arians but the Stile of his Petition is swelling and pathetical In it you Every Reader must needs see that these Reflections were inserted here more for the sake of the Protestants than of the Luciferians Either all Abuses ought always to be tolerated or a Reformer is not to be blamed upon the score of his Office And when Men set up for Reformers the Cause only is to be considered not the Pretences which if it be just they have no reason to be ashamed of any of these things here urged against them as Marks of Obloquy if their Numbers are small they ought to shew by a proportionable firmness of Mind that they place their Confidence in a Being that is Superiour to any Powers here below and if they find Fault with the multitude who do not joyn with them they Act according to their own Principles since all Men who think themselves to be in the Right must believe that their Adversaries are mistaken their standing to their own Assertions cannot reasonably be Interpreted to be injurious to Men in Eminent Places Constancy Contempt of the World of Life Riches and Honours are Vertues which when Supported by a good Cause are glorious Ingredients in the Characters of the greatest Saints and therefore are favourable Prejudices for all those Reformers in whom they are to be found if they are too apt to attribute the ill Successes of their Enemies to Divine Vengeance they are not Singular since all Parties and even all Religions constantly practise it if they are hardly used they may reasonably complain of their Usage and Mr. du Pin knows that his Church has always taken very particular Care that her Adversaries should never complain against her for Persecuting without Just Cause whilest they believe themselves to be in the right Reformers as all Men naturally do will aggravate their Sufferings that they may lay load upon their Persecutors and last of all every Man is tempted to think his Adversary's Zeal for Religion to be only Hypocritical If we consider what good Success these Two Luciferian Priests had in their Business we ought not hastily to condemn them Theodosius the Great always shew'd an unshaken Zeal for the Orthodox Faith and his Carriage towards St. Ambrose who censured him for his hasty and cruel Orders against the Thessalonians was an Evidence how very much he Reverenc'd the Orders and Discipline of the Church and besides if we reflect upon the Accounts which Ammianus Marcellinus gives us of the Differences between Damasus and Ursicinus they will seem to plead for Ursicinus's Party His being a Heathen is no prejudice against him in this Matter because he was not a Bigot against the Christian Religion so that it rather gave him the Advantage which all Neuters have of judging impartially of both sides may see the Humour and Genius of all Reformers who Glory in their small number who blame the Multitude who rend in Pieces the Reputation of those who are promoted to Dignities who testify their Indignation against the Higher Powers who make a show of much Firmness and Constancy of a great Contempt of this Life of Honours and Riches who look upon themselves as unblameable and attribute to the Divine Vengeance all the Fatal Accidents which happen to those that are not their Friends who are always complaining of being Persecuted and ill used who exaggerate the Evils which they justly suffer and affect to show a great Zeal for Plety and Religion PHILASTRIUS PHILASTRIUS Bishop of Brescia flourish'd under the Elder Theodosius and was one of the Bishops in the Council of Aquileia St. Austin says That he had seen him sometimes with Philastrius St. Ambrose We have his Life written as is thought by St. Gaudentius his Successor He died before St. Ambrose about the Year 387 a About the Year 387. The Author of this Life says That he died before St. Ambrose In Heresy 63 't is said that he wrote in the Year 430 but 't is plain that this was the Mistake of a Figure and that they put a C for an L which would make it just 380. He wrote a Treatise of Heresies wherein he reckons 20 Heresies before the Birth of Jesus Christ and 128 afterwards to the Year 380 in which he wrote and tells in a few Words the principal Errors of each of them St. Austin observes at the beginning of his Book about Heresies that it was a surprizing thing that Philastrius who was much less learned and less exact than St. Epiphanius should reckon up many more Heresies than he did from whence he concludes that these two Authors could not have the same Notions of Heresy because indeed it is very difficult to give a just Definition of it Wherefore adds St. Austin in giving the Catalogue of Heresies we must carefully avoid these two opposite extremes whereof one is to make those Heresies that are not and the other is to omit those Heresies which really are such 'T is a rare thing for those who make the Catalogues of Heresies to fall into this last Fault but the first is very common and Philastrius was more subject to it than any body For he feigns a multitude of Heresies that never were b Heresies that never were As the Nazareans the Heliognosts the Adorers of Mice the Muscaronnites the Troglodites in the Old Testament the Fortunatians the Baalites the Celebites the Molochites the Tophites making several Sects of Hereticks of the Abominations committed by the Jews and the Sacrifices of the People that were their Neighbours
contempt of Riches but I cannot forget that place where he says That he broke in pieces the Sacred Vessels to redeem Captives He justifies himself in this Action or rather he draws from it a great deal of Glory The Church says he was founded without Gold if she has it now 't is to give it and not to keep it 't is for assisting the Poor with it in their great Necessities What would be said of a Bishop who to preserve the lifeless Vessels would suffer the living Members of Christ to perish Would he say I am afraid lest the Temple of the Lord should be spoil'd of its Ornaments Might it not be answered to him That 't is not necessary that the Sacraments of the Altar should be administred in Gold or Silver That the Redemption of Captives was an Ornament much more pleasing in the sight of God That those Vessels could not be put to a nobler Use than when they are employ'd to redeem the Lives of Christians That the true Treasure of the Lord is that which has the same effect with his Blood That then a Vessel is known to be truly the Lord's when there is a double Redemption to be observ'd in it that is when the exteriour Vessel redeems from the Enemy those whom the Blood of Jesus Christ had redeem'd from Sin He justifies also this Conduct by the Example of St. Laurence who show'd the Poor when the Treasures of the Church were demanded of him At last He concludes That tho' it be a Crime to break the Vessels of the Church to turn them to our own Profit yet on the contrary it is an Act of Charity and Vertue to do it to distribute them to the Poor to redeem Captives or to build a Church when such things are necessary He adds That he used that Precaution as to take first the Vessels which were not Consecrated and afterwards to break and melt those that were lest any should turn the Sacred Chalices to profane Uses He concludes this Book with recommending to the Clergy to keep with Faithfulness and Courage what is deposited in the Churches by Widows and relates some Examples of the Boldness wherewith some have defended these things against those who came to invade them And here I must resume the 24th Ch. of which I have said nothing St. Ambrose there describes the chief Duties of Clergy-men towards others in a few Words We must says he prepare our selves by good Actions and by a good Intention to receive Offices and chiefly those of the Clergy We must not carry our selves proudly in them nor estrange our selves from them by negligence we must equally shun Ambition and the Affectation of refusing them Simplicity and Uprightness comprehends all and these are of themselves commendable enough In the Exercise of his Ministry he must neither be too severe nor too remiss lest he should seem either to exercise his Authority with Dominion over the Flock or else to neglect the Duties of his Ministry he must endeavour to oblige all the World A Bishop should consider and protect the Priests and the other Clergy-men he should not be offended if they purchase Esteem either by their Charity or their Fasting or their Piety oâ— their Learning But these ought not to exalt themselves much less employ their own Merits to diminish the Reputation of their Bishop The Wicked must not be defended nor Holy Things given to those that are unworthy of them but neither are we to reprove and condemn any Person till he be convicted of a Fault For if Injustice be otherwise above all things offensive it is insupportable in the Church where every thing should be regulated according to Equity where Impartiality should be observed The Powerful and Rich ought to have no more Authority than the Poor because the Rich and Poor are all one in Jesus Christ. The most Holy should attribute nothing more to himself than others for the more Holy he is the more Humble he ought to be When we Judge we ought not to have any respect of Persons Favour should have no place in our Judgments but only the Justice of the Cause Nothing does more wound the Reputation and Credit which we may have than to betray the Cause of the weak in Favour of those that are more Powerful to reprove a Poor Man that is Innocent severely and to excuse a Rich Man that is Guilty 'T is true that we are naturally inclin'd to favour Great Persons lest they find that Injustice has been done them and afterwards revenge themselves upon us But First if you be afraid of making your self Enemies do not meddle with judging or opposing You can say nothing when a Matter of Interest is under debate tho' it were better done to protect Justice but when the Cause of God lies at stake or it is to be fear'd that the Impious will be admitted to the Communion of the Church then it is a very heinous Sin for Clergy-men to use Dissimulation In the First Chapter of the Third Book St. Ambrose shows That this Maxim of Scipio That he was never more busy nor less alone than when he was by himself was ancienter than Scipio and that it was verified in a more Illustrious manner in Moses Elias Elisha and the Apostles who did so many wonderful things when they seem'd to mind nothing He adds That a Just Man is never alone because he is always with God That he is never idle because he is always meditating That he seems to be unknown and yet is Famous That when he is thought to be Dead he then enjoys a more happy Life That he is never more joyful than when others think him to be under Affliction That he is never richer than when he is poor because he places all his Happiness in Justice and Honesty He observes afterwards That the Comparison which the Philosophers make between the Good of Honesty and of Profit has no place among Christians because they acknowledge nothing Profitable to be Good which is not also Honest. He distinguishes two sorts of Good and of Duty that which is more and that which is less perfect In short he maintains That a Just Man ought never to seek his own Profit by doing Injury to others but on the contrary that he ought to seek the Good of others above his own He enlarges upon this Maxim and proves that for any Man to do Injury to his Neighbour for his own Profit is contrary to the Example and to the Law of Jesus Christ to the Law of Nature to the Dictates of Conscience and to the Civil Laws Pursuant to this Principle he determines that a Christian in a Shipwrack ought not to snatch from his Brother the Plank which he has taken to save himself and that he ought not to fight against a Robber who would set upon him and lays it down for a General Maxim That 't is never lawful to preserve our own Life by putting another to Death The Philosophers
has plainly owned it to be false when he says in Heres 75 that Prayers for the Dead could expiate some Sins tho' they could not blot out great Crimes The Fifth Dogm of the Church which Soultetus opposes by St. Epiphanius is the Vow of Continence But the Passages which he alledges are so far from opposing it that they plainly discover that it was used in the time of this Father and that the Church punish'd those very severely who violated it The last is about Baptism administred by Women St. Epiphanius in Heres 76 says that it was not lawful for them to baptize Do not we say so also But does it follow from thence that their doing of it in a case of necessity is not valid This is what Scultetus should prove but it is not the Question of St. Epiphanius These are the false Consequences which Scultetus urges to oppose the Doctrine of the Church But he does so grosly calumniate us by charging upon us the detestable Opinions of some Hereticks that he must have renounced all kind of Modesty to affirm such manifest Untruths with so much boldness First of all He accuses us of making Women the Ministers of Baptism as the Marcionites did But where is it found that Women do Administer Baptism in our Churches They never do it but in great necessity And 't is no Heresy to say That in this Case all Sorts of Persons may Administer it 't is no part of the Error of the Marcionites or the Collyridians Secondly He charges us with trusting to Revelations and Miracles as the Nazarenes did But is it an Error to believe that there have been and that there may be Revelations That Man must have no Religion who says the contrary The Hereticks are to blame for reigning false Miracles but the Catholicks are not to blame for Believing true ones Thirdly He compares Transubstantiation to the Enchantments of Marcus who having put white Wine into a Glass made one part of the Liquor appear Red as Blood another of a Purple colour and a Third of a Blew But what Affinity is there between our Holy and Sacred Mysteries and the Diabolical Actions of these Ministers of Daemons What Relation has our Doctrine to these Impieties The other Accusations of Scultetus are no less Calumnious For do we offer the Sacrifice of the Mass in honour of the Virgin as the Collyridians did Do we teach that Concubinate is lawful as Aëtius did Do we adore Idols The Images to which we pay a bare External Respect are they the Images of Simon and Helena and other Hereticks Are they not the Images of Jesus Christ and the Saints to whose Persons only all our Worship is referred Do we condemn Marriage and the use of Meats as Tatian and the Encratites did Do we believe that the Souls of the Wicked may be delivered out of Hell In short Is there any Similitude between all the Errors of the Hereticks related by St. Epiphanius and the Doctrines of the Church Do not we Believe what the Church Believed in his Time Do not we Practise what she Practis'd On the contrary are not they the Innovators of our Time who take part with the Hereticks of that Time against the Church Do not they deny with Aetius the distinction of Bishops and Presbyters Do not they find fault with Prayers for the Dead and the Honour which is given to Saints Do not they condemn the Celibacy of Priests the Vow of Virginity the Monastick State the Ceremonies the Sign of the Cross the Solemn Prayers These are the Errors which St. Epiphanius condemns in the Hereticks of his Time and which he refutes by the Practice and Tradition of the Church And therefore that may justly be charged upon the Sect of Innovators which Scultetus has unjustly charged upon Us That their Doctrine is a Garment patched together and made up of many Pieces and many Shreds Who is most in the right Scultetus or our Author will not be hard to judge to any one who is acquainted with undisguised Popery I say undisguised because Mr. Du Pin goes upon the palliating Principles laid down by the Bishop of Meaux There is no question but the Seeds of those Corruptions began to spring up in St. Epiphanius's Time which afterwards grew so high in the Church yet tho' they honoured the Dead who died in the Lord and prayed for those who were Guilty of lesser Sins they neither called upon the former nor believed a middle State for the latter if St. Epiphanius's Authority be decisive in those places which are faithfully urged by Scultetus In the case of Images in Churches Mr. Du Pin gives it up because St. Epiphanius says expresly that it was against the Word of God Contra auctoritatem Scripturae In the Matter of the Real Presence our Author and Petavius before him lay great Stress upon a Passage in the Anchoratus Sect. 57. wherein speaking of the Sacrament as Christ's Body he says 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He that does not Believe it to be the real Body of Christ as he said himself is fallen from Grace and Salvation Now to know the full meaning of St. Epiphanius in these Words we are to go back to the beginning of Sect. 55. There he raises a dispute of the meaning of Adam's being created after the Image of God since there is so great disparity between their Natures And he finds that this cannot be Physically understood because to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are very different things yet since it is said in Scripture we ought to believe it Now to prove this Assertion he urges the Institution of the Lord's Supper Our Saviour said says he of the Bread This is my Body and yet it is not like Flesh in the least so as to resemble Christ's Humane Nature nor like the invisible Godhead so as to resemble his Divinity But because he has said it we must not dispute it since if we should dispute it we should fall away from Grace and Salvation This Illustration therefore cannot in reason be carried farther than the Original Question which it was designed to illustrate wherefore seeing that St. Epiphanius confessed that when we say that Man is created after the Image of God we do not mean that he is created after the Nature of the Invisible Incomprehensible and Spiritual God it is plain that his illustration of the Eucharist is equally figurative as this Expression of Man's Nature which he is now explaining But it is needless to run through all the rest of the Articles here particularly named St. Epiphanius's Authority is decisive of neither side if it were we must believe that Divorces are lawful for other Causes besides Adultery and that such Divorces perfectly dissolve the Marriage Bond for this was his Opinion as appears from Heres 59. Sect. 4. of ancient Heresies The Stile of St. Epiphanius is neither beautiful nor lofty on the contrary it is plain
Poor degenerate Civilities towards rich men without reason favours ill-bestowed which prove hurtfull both to the giver and to the receiver guilty fear bashfulness in speaking false modesty silence cowardice and fear of reproving great Men. There is no slavery equal to ours which makes us do even shamefull things to please Women They have got such Power that they give and take away Bishopricks even to whom and from whom they please Hence it is that all things are turned upside down Those that should obey will be Directours of those that are to command Yet I pretend not to tax all Bishops with the Crimes now mentioned there being many I say many who have not been caught in these snares and who far exceed those in number that are unhappily fallen into them Neither will I say that the Episcopal Dignity is the cause of these Evils I am not so extravagant as to have any such thought The Sword is not the cause of Murder nor Wine of Drunkenness c. All wise Men accuse and punish such as abuse God's Gifts as the true Authors of those Abuses And the Episcopal Dignity is so far from being guilty of these Evils that it may rather complain that Men do not exercise it well We are those whom it may upbraid Since we dishonour it as much as in us lies when we admit the first that comes who having not examined their own strength nor considered the greatness and importance of that Office receive it readily as soon as it is offered And when they are obliged to act being blinded with Darkness they ingage their People in a thousand Disorders For from whence think you do so many Troubles arise in the Church I see no other Spring of them besides the want of Circumspection and Choice in the Election of Bishops He Discourses afterwards of the necessary qualities in a Bishop and affirms that the first is to have no desire to that Dignity which ought to be looked upon with respect and such a moderation as may inspire Men with a Desire to avoid so important and difficult an Office And also that when a Man engages in it he should not stay for the Judgment of others to quit it but having committed faults unworthy of the same he should depose himself Perhaps says he it will be objected to me that I contradict the Words of S. Paul That he that desireth to be a Bishop desireth a good work but I am so far from opposing that I do only follow them since it is the desire of the Power and not of the Work which I condemn The second quality noted by S. Chrysostom as requisite in a Bishop is to be clear-sighted and vigilant because he lives not for himself but for a great People The Third according to his Opinion is Meekness he observes That a Bishop ought not to be Peevish Violent or Angry and that whatsoever his other Vertues be if these be in him he is not worthy to be a Bishop He saith further That the Vices of a Bishop are of worse consequence than those of a private Man because when they are once discovered they cause a general Scandal and draw others by their example and besides the least faults of a Bishop being magnified by envious Men will utterly ruine his Reputation In the next place he gives an account of the Disputes and Dissentions which commonly attend the Election of a Bishop and that the reason of it is because they do not all agree in the only design which they ought to have which is to chuse the Wisest and most Vertuous They says he have all different Pretences of promoting a Man to an Office one will have this Man because he is of a Noble Family another votes for the other because he is rich and a third endeavours to advance his Friend or his Kinsman This last goes by Caballing and getting of Favour No Man chooses the most worthy no Man hath respect either to Vertue or Merit Then he concludes this Book by a Description of the three main duties of a Bishop viz. The care of Widows of Virgins consecrated to God and their obligation to do Justice to the People and to help them in their necessities S. Chrysostom having ended this Discourse Basil told him That had he sued for that Dignity his fear might have been rational but having been chosen when he sought it not he ought to think himself secure in accepting it S. Chrysostom answers That not only those that seek for Ecclesiastical Promotions thro' Ambition but also those that do not discharge them well shall be severely punished because they should have refus'd them knowing that they were above their Capacity and that even those shall be without excuse who through insufficiency do not perform their Functions in the Church as they ought under pretence that they were forced to accept of them neither shall they be acquitted before God who chuse Insufficient Men by saying that they were deceived and that they knew them not This ought to oblige those that are to chuse to consider well what choice they make and those that are chosen to examine themselves Whether they are capable of the Dignity to which they are to be promoted He discourses afterwards of a Bishop's Learning that being to preach God's word with Strength and Knowledge to refute Pagans Jews and Hereticks and to instruct the Faithful he hath great need of Learning of Prudence and Eloquence He goes on in the next Book to speak of the Conditions which are necessary to exercise the Ministry of God's Word as we ought He observes That Commendation is not to be regarded and that Envy and Malice is to be despised but that a good Reputation is to be maintain'd by constant labour That a good Bishop ought not to be proud for being praised nor dejected when he is blamed and that his only aim in his Discourses should be to please God This saith he is the only Rule and the only Object which they ought to propose to themselves in this excellent Ministry and not to be applauded and praised If Men do commend them let them not reject their Commendations if they do not let them not desire it nor be concerned at the omission This is sufficient comfort for him in his Labour yea the greatest he can have if he knows in his Conscience that he hath studied his Discourses for no other end than that they might be acceptable to God only adding that he cannot be envious against nor jealous of those who have more talents than himself In the last Book he proves That Bishops have need of a higher degree of Vertue than Monks because they are exposed to many more dangers and that it is easier to live well in a Solitude than as a Bishop yea that whatsoever Vertues Monks may have yet they are not fit to be Bishops because the accidents of a Bishop's life may easily excite those Vices and Infirmities which were hid in Solitude
Lastly he declares That the trouble he was in when they spake of making him Bishop made him resolve to hide himself He sets forth this trouble by two Comparisons the one by describing the vexation which a Princess incomparable both for Beauty and Vertue might be in who being passionately beloved by a Prince should be forced to marry a mean and contemptible Man the other by describing the astonishment of a Clown that was forced to take upon him the Conduct of both a great Land-Army and of a Navy that was ready to give Battel to a dreadful Enemy He concludes by comforting Basil who was afflicted to see himself ingaged in so hard an Employment and loaded with so heavy a Burden Some say that he writ these excellent Books when he was very young which is not likely Others think with Socrates That he composed them while he was a Deacon but it seems rather that he made them in his Retirement before he was ordained Deacon about the Year 376. The three Books in defence of a Monastical Life against those that blamed that state were the first fruits of S. Chrysostom's Retreat In the first he argues for a Monastical way of life because of the usefulness and necessity of separating from the World In the Second he answers the Gentiles who complained that their Children forsook them to retire into desart places and then he comforts the Christians who were troubled to see themselves bereaved of their Children that embraced a Solitary Life to dwell in Wildernesses He affirms in these Books That a Monk is more glorious more powerful and richer than a Man of the World representing the great difficulty of saving our selves in the World and how hard it is to bring up Children to Christianity and comparing the condition of a Monk with that of Saints and Angels The short Discourse upon the comparison of a Monk with a Prince is upon the same Subject He shews That Men are mistaken who preferr the condition of Kings before that of Monks and retired Men. First Because the greatness of Kings ends with them whereas the advantages of a retired Life continues after death 2. Because the advantages of Retirement are much more considerable than the Fortune of Great Men. 3. Because it is more glorious for a Man to command his Passions than to rule whole Nations 4. Because the War of a Monk is nobler than that of a great Captain and his Victory more certain the one fights against invisible Powers and the other against mortal Men the one engages for the defence of Piety and the honour of God the other for his own Interest or Glory 5. Because a Prince is a charge to himself and to others by reason of those many things which he needs whereas a Monk wants nothing does good to all and by his Prayers obtains those Graces which the most powerful Princes cannot give 6. Because the loss of Piety may sooner be repaired than the loss of a Kingdom Lastly Because after death a Monk goeth in splendor to meet Jesus Christ and entreth immediately into Heaven whereas tho' a King seems to have ruled his Kingdom with Justice and Equity a thing very rare yet they shall be less glorious and not so happy there being a great difference in point of Holiness between a good King and a holy Monk who hath bestowed all his time and care upon praising God But if this King hath lived ill who can express the greatness of those punishments that attend him He concludeth in these words Let us not admire their Riches nor preferr their happiness before that of these poor Monks Let us never say that this rich Man is happy because he is cloathed with sumptuous Apparel carried in a fine Coach and followed by many Footman These Riches and great Pomps last but for a time and all the Felicity that attends them ends with the Life whereas the Happiness of Monks endures for ever It was likewise in his Solitude that he writ the two Books of Compunction of Heart whereof the first is dedicated to Demetrius and the second to Stelechius In these Books he discourses of the necessity and conditions of a true and sincere Repentance affirming That Christians ought to have their sins always in view to abhorr them with all their Heart to lament and continually beg of God the forgiveness of them That this sorrow ought to be a motion of that Charity which the Holy Ghost inspireth into our Hearts and to be animated with the fire of a Divine Love which consumeth sin and is accompanied with a Spirit of Mortification and Disinteressedness from the Goods of this World with an esteem of the Treasures of Heaven and of Spiritual Vertues He saith in the first Book That it is not Grace only which makes us do good since we ought our selves to contribute on our part all that depends upon our Wills and Strength wherefore saith he God's Grace is given to every one of us but it abideth only in the Hearts of them that keep the Commandments and departeth from them that correspond not with it neither doth it enter into their Souls who begin not to turn to the Lord. When God converted S. Paul he foresaw his good Will before he gave him his Grace The Three Books of Providence were composed by S. Chrysostom when he came out of his Solitude and returned to Antioch There he comforteth a Friend of his one Stagirius who having quitted the World was so tormented with an Evil Spirit that he was ready to fall into Despair exhorting him to look upon that affliction as a Grace of God rather than a Punishment for as much as it appears by the most notable Examples both of the old and of the new Law that from Adam to S. Paul Troubles and Afflictions have commonly been the lot of the Saints and Righteous Men For this reason these Books are intituled Of Providence because they clear that great Question which so much perplexed the learned Gentiles Why the Righteous are afflicted and persecuted if there be a Providence over-ruling the things of the World He sheweth there that this Question hath no difficulty if Men believe that there is another Life a Heaven and a Hell For saith he since every one is punished or rewarded in another World to what end are we concerned at what happens in this If wicked Men only were persecuted here we should easily believe that out of this World there is neither Punishments nor Rewards and were there none but good Men in affliction Vertue might be looked upon as the cause of Adversity and Crimes the reason of Prosperity Of necessity therefore there must be in this World righteous and wicked Men some happy and others unhappy He adds That by God's permission the Righteous are afflicted to expiate their sins and to correct them for their faults He saith further That God makes use of the Righteous Man's Fear to oblige others to look to themselves and to
the Divine Nature is so high and unsearchable that it is not possible to comprehend it and pursues this Reasoning so far that he sticketh not to say that Seraphims and Angels themselves do not see the Substance of God but only an Emanation of his Divine Light This passage Ib. Orat. 1 hath made some modern Greeks suppose that the Saints do not see the Substance of God but only a Corporeal Light such as they say appeared upon Mount Tabor This also hath exercised the Subtilty of our Divines who constitute Happiness in the Vision of the Substance of God And yet S. Chrysostom hath respect in this passage neither to that Light of the Modern Greeks not to the Disputes of the Schoolmen his only design is to shew against Aetius that the Divine Nature is not to be comprehended and that evident Reasons of the Mysteries are not to be given It is not necessary to inlarge upon the Opinions of S. Chrysostom concerning the Mystery of the Trinity it is certain that he maintained the Faith of the Council of Nice and that he proved the Divinity both of the Son and of the Holy Ghost yet it ought to be observed that he was of Meletius's opinion concerning the Signification of the word Hypostasis and that he owned Three Hypostases and one Nature in God As to the Mystery of the Incarnation tho' he was equally contrary to the Errour Ep. ad Caesarium Homil. de Consub in lib. Quod Christus sit Deus V. Theodor. in Dialog of those who distinguished two Persons in Christ and that of those who confounded the two Natures and their Properties yet he in several passages of his Writings declared against the latter Opinion very eagerly In his Panegyricks of the Saints he ascribeth to them all manner of Felicity Homil de B. Philog Hom. de S S. Homil. 39. in ep 1. ad Cor. Hom. 28. in ep ad Hebr. Hom. 29. Matth. he places them in Heaven in the same Rank with Angels and Archangels of Prophets and Martyrs and yet in other places he seems to affirm that their Happiness is referred to the Day of Judgment but these may agree well enough if we say that he spake in the latter of a perfect and consummated Happiness Angels if we believe S. Chrysostom are so called because they declare the Will of God unto Men for which cause the Scripture representeth them with Wings Homil. 3. de Incompreh Hom. 3. in ep ad Coloss. Hom. 14. in ep ad Hebr. They take care of Men are present at Divine Services and every Christian hath his Guardian Angel The Devil is not wicked of his own Nature but is become such by Sin God permits him to tempt Men for their good It is a Childish thing to believe that Hom. de Diabolo tentatore Hom. 22. in Genesim those are Angels which the Scripture calleth the Children of God in Genesis and of whom it is said that they conversed with the Daughters of Men since they are of a spiritual and incorporeal Nature He Confesses in several places that the Fall of the first Men was prejudicial to the whole Race which ever since is become subject to Pains Sicknesses and Death from which it was free before Sin He acknowledgeth that an inclination to Evil and Lusts are Consequences of the first Man's sin but he seemeth not to have owned Original sin after the same manner that S. Austin doth at least it cannot be denied that he hath given another Sence to those places of S. Paul which seem to prove it most As for Example when he expoundeth that famous passage Rom. 5. 12. By One man sin entred into the World c. He understandeth of Death what S. Paul saith of Sin because it is the Wages of Sin and upon those other words of the same Chapter As by the disobedience of one many are become Guilty c. This Sentence saith he seems to have much of Difficulty for how can it be that one only Man having sinned many should be made guilty by his sin We may easily conceive that the first Man being become mortal it was necessary that his Off-spring should be mortal likewise but what Likelihood and what Reason is there that a man should be a Sinner because of anothers disobedience ... What then signifyeth the word Sinner In my Opinion it signifyeth nothing else but a condemned Man subject to Pain and Death This is a way of speaking which does not agree with S. Augustin's Doctrine Tho' it is not hard to defend S. Chrysostom by saying That tho' he spake thus yet he admitted all that Divines own concerning Original sin For what is Original sin according to them It is either a Privation of Original righteousness or Lust with the guilt of Sin or pain and Guilt together But S. Chrysostom acknowledges all these for in the first place he Confesseth that by the first Man's sin all men were deprived and spoiled of the State of Innocence that they are become not only mortal and subject to Pain and Grief but also inclined to Evil. Thus in his Opinion Lust is an effect of the first Man's sin and that Concupiscence in men makes them unworthy of eternal Life if the Grace of Jesus Christ saveth them not by Baptism He ascribes much to the strength of Free-will He always speaks as if he believed that it depends upon our selves to do good or evil and affirms that God always gives his Grace to those De verbis Jer. Hom. 1. Hom. 2. in 1. ad Cor. Hom. 41. in Genesim Hom. de tribus pueris Hom. 12. in ep ad Hebr. 8. in ep ad Phil. 19. ibid Hom. 17. in Joan. Hom. 18. in ep ad Rom. 12. in ep 1. ad Cor. In Matth. Hom. 83. Hom. 45. in Joan. In orat de S. Pelagia Serm. de Zachaeo Hom. 34. in Matth. Hom. 80. in ep ad Rom. Hom. 16. 18. in ep ad Rom. Hom. de obscur Prophet Serm. 5. de Lazaro Hom. 45. in Matth. who on their side doe all they can That we must begin and God makes an end That he followeth the motions of our Wills and giveth them their Perfection yet he owns the necessity of Grace to do good but submits it still to our Will So that according to him We are to will and chuse the good and God gives us the necessary Grace to fulfil the same he prevents not our Will that our Liberty may not be prejudiced he worketh good in us but that is when we are willing when our Will is determined he draweth to himself but only those who do all their endeavours to come near to him Those Principles about foreknowledge and Predestination agree very well with these Conclusions God did not predestinate men but as he foresaw their merits foreknowledge is not the cause of the event of things but God foresaw them because they shall happen He calls all men Jesus Christ died
He observes that before these Homilies there was one upon Psalm 4. Printed in the Seventh Volume of the Eaton Edition of S. Chrysostom pag. 431. which he likewise attributeth to the same Asterius I confess I mis-trust very much the Quotations of these Catenae and I should rather believe that these Commentaries belong to Asterius the Philosopher who according to the Testimony of the Ancients writ a Commentary upon the Psalms than to the Bishop of Amasea who is not said to have written upon that Subject Cotelerius pretends that the Conformity both of Stile and Doctrine demonstrate that these Homilies were written by Asterius Amasenus But tho' I pay a great deference to the Judgment of that learned Man yet I find no such Resemblance however I would not be believed upon my own word but leave it to those to judge who will take the Pains to compare them The Stile of Asterius Amasenus is plain but with a great deal of natural Beauty His Characters and Descriptions are excellent His Sermons would be esteemed in this Age where those things are extremely valued He is very severe in his Morals the Reflections he makes are exact and solid He explains the Scripture-Parables after an ingenious manner and draws from them very useful Thoughts He doth not excite his Auditors by violent Motions as great Orators do but insinuates into their minds Christian Truths by his agreeable and natural way of proposing them and infensibly begets in them an Abhorrency of Vice and a love of Vertue only by a bare Picture lively drawn ANASTASIUS ANASTASIUS was chosen Bishop of Rome after the Death of Pope Siricius Anno. 398. He was an illustrious Person as commendable for neglecting his private Interest as for his Anastasius Pastoral Vigilance Under his Pontificate Flavianus and the Eastern Bishops were reconciled to the Church of Rome and to the other Western Churches The business of the Origenists making a great noise in the Church he thought it his Duty to declare his Sense of that matter He therefore made a Decree after the Example of Theophilus whereby he condemned both the Works and the person of Origen and being informed that Ruffinus the Priest was his chief Defender he cited him to come to Rome and appear before him but Ruffinus deferring to appear he condemned him as an Heretick in the Year 401. at the Sollicitation of a Lady called Marcella who produced Evidences against him her self and shewed the Errors that he had left in the Translation of the Books of Origen's Principles as S. Jerom says Ep. 16. John of Jerusalem having heard of this Judgment writ him a very civil Letter wherein after abundance of Commendations he spake in Ruffinus his behalf Anastasius having returned him thanks for his Complements answered That he could not but condemn Ruffinus his conduct because he had translated the Books of Origen's Principles with a design that the People should read them as Catholick Books that the Fear he was in least they should corrupt the Doctrine of the faithful in his Church obliged him to condemn them that he was informed that the Emperours had made an Edict to forbid the reading of Origen's works that Ruffinus having approved in his Translation the Opinions of Origen deserved to be treated after the same manner as he that first published them Lastly he declares that he will hear no more of him that he might seek for Absolution where he pleased for his part he looked upon him as an excommunicated person This is the only true Letter of Anastasius the two others are written by Isidore The first directed to the German and Burgundian Bishops is dated Fourteen years before Anastasius was Pope Those of Burgundy to whom it is directed were not then converted It is made up of several passages of the Letters of Innocent S. Leo and Flavianus c. It is full of Faults and far from the Stile of the true Anastasius The second addressed to Nectarius is dated Fourteen years after Anastasius his Death and is taken out of Innocent S. Leo Gregory c. We have not the first Synodical Letter of Anastasius wherein he condemned Origen's Books nor the Letter wherein he cited Ruffinus nor that directed to Venerius of Milan whereof he speaks in his Letter to John It is believed that he writ a Treatise of the Incarnation directed to Ursinus whereof some Fragments are found at the latter end of Liberatus's Breviary But it is certain that they belong to Anastasius This Pope died in the beginning of the Year 402 and left Innocent his Successor CHROMATIUS Bishop of Aquileia CHROMATIUS Bishop of Aquileia whom S. Jerom in his Preface to the Chronicles calleth the most Holy and Learned Bishop of his time writ and preached several Sermons There is Chromat Bishop of Aquileia but one Discourse of his extant upon the Beatitudes upon Christ's Sermon on the Mount and upon the words of S. John to Jesus Christ I ought to be baptized of thee Which probably is a Fragment of a Commentary composed by this Saint upon the whole Gospel of S. Matt. He explaineth the Letter of the Gospel insisting particularly upon the Moral Precepts thereof In the Exposition of what the Gospel saith concerning Divorces he seems to have believed That a Man might Marry another Wife after being divorced for the cause of Adultery but he condemneth those that abandon their Wives upon any other Account and Marry again tho' he confesseth that humane Laws allowed it He expounds the Lord's Prayer and recommends the Exercise thereof the Love of our Neighbour Alms-deeds Fasting and other Vertues spoken of in Christ's Sermon upon the Mount In the last Fragment he discourseth of the Efficacy of Christ's Baptism The Stile of this Author is not very lofty but his words are well chosen his Notions just his Expositions literal and his Reflections useful He was one of the most famous Bishops of the West and held Correspondence with the Learnedest men of his time He is one of the Three to whom S. Chrysostom directed the Letter to demand help of the Western Bishops and he subscribed the Letters written for him to the East His Works were printed by themselves at Basil in 1528. and at Lovain in 1548. and afterwards in the Bibliotheca Patrum I say nothing of a Letter bearing the Name of Chromatius directed to S. Jerom in which he desires to have the Martyrology of Eusebius It being certain that both this Letter and the pretended Answer of S. Jerom are spurious as Baronius evidently proves in the Seventh Chapter of his Preface to the Roman Martyrology GAUDENTIUS Bishop of Brescia SAint Philastrius Bishop of Brescia who composed the Book of Heresies mentioned in the foregoing Century dying in 386. in the Year 387 the Bishops of the Province together with Gaudentius Bishop of Brescia S. Ambrose did with the Consent of the people chuse for his Successor Gaudentius who was gone to travel in the East But fearing
King's Library The Psalter of Pope John made at Vienna John the XXIId is thought to be the Man meant by that Title The following Treatise upon the Magnificat is a Fragment of the Treatise of Hugo de S. Victore upon this Hymn That of the Virgin 's Assumption is a Sermon of some Author of the Twelfth Century or thereabouts which teacheth that the Blessed Virgin is in Heaven both Soul and Body Both the Discourses concerning Visiting the Sick contain useful Rules to teach Priests how they should behave themselves towards Sick Persons but they are very late Both the Discourses of the Comfort for the Dead are of the same Nature and it may be of the same Author The Treatise of Christian Behaviour is a Collection of Notions taken out of St. Eloi or Eligius Bishop of Noyon and Caesarius The Discourse upon the Creed is likewise a Collection of Remarks drawn out of Rufinus Caesarius St. Gregory Ivo Carnutensis and others The Sermon upon Easter-Eve about the Paschal-Lamb and that upon the * What this Book upon the 41st Sermon shou'd be I cannot tell it is false Printed in all probability but not having this Benedictine Edition of St. Augustin by me I could not alter it 41st Sermon are among the Books falsly attributed to St. Jerom. The three Sermons to the Novices concerning Unction Baptism and washing of the Feet are not like St. Augustin's Writings though they are attributed to him in very ancient Manuscripts The Treatise of the Creation of the first Man is inserted entire into the Book of the Spirit and the Soul It is among St. Ambrose's VVorks entituled a Treatise of the Dignity of the first Man and among Alcuinus's it is intituled Thoughts of the Blessed Albinus a Levite upon these words of Genesis Let us make Man after our own Image The Sermon of the Vanity of this present Age is inserted into the Treatise of Christian Behaviour The Author of the Sermon upon the contempt of the World is not known That about the Advantage of Discipline belongs to Valerianus Cemeliensis It is not known who was the Author of the Sermons of Obedience Humility Prayer Alms and that of the Generality of Alms-deeds The small Discourse of the Twelve Prayers spoken of in the 21st Chapter of the Revelations belongs perhaps to Amatus a Monk of Mount-Cassin or rather an Extract of Bede's Commentary upon that Passage in the Revelations Finally The Sermons to the Brethren that live in the Wilderness are the Work of some Modern Monk who was so imprudent as to publish them under St. Augustin's Name though it be as clear as the day that they are not of this Father Baronius observes That they were Compos'd by an Impostor and that they are full of Fables Falsities and Lyes Bellarmin saith That the Stile of them is Childish Course and Barbarous There are several Passages out of St. Augustin Caesarius and St. Gregory It is probable that the Author was a Flemming The SEVENTH TOME THE Seventh Volume contains St. Augustin's great Work of the City of God He undertook Tom. VII it about the Year 413. after the taking of Rome by Alaric King of the Goths to refute the Heathens who attributed that Misfortune to the Christian Religion This VVork held him several Years by reason of many intervening Businesses which he could not put off so that he did not finish it before the Year 426. It is divided into Two and twenty Books whereof the first Five refute those who believe that the worship of the Gods is necessary for the good of the VVorld and affirmed That all the Mischiefs lately happened proceeded from no other cause but the abolishing of that Religion The next Five are against those who confessing that the same Calamities have been in all Ages yet pretend that the worship of the Heathen Divinities was profitable to a future Life Thus the Ten first Books are to Answer both those Chimerical Opinions which are contrary to the Christian Religion But lest they should reproach him with having refuted the Opinions of others without establishing the Christian Religion the other part of this VVork is allotted to that purpose and it consists of Twelve Books though he sometimes establisheth our belief in the former Ten and so in the Twelve others he sometimes correcteth the Errors of our Adversaries In the Four first of these Twelve he describes The Original of the two Cities the one of God and the other of the VVorld In the Four next their Progress And in the Four last their Ends And so though all the 22. Books do equally treat of both Cities yet this VVork has its Name from the better and they are commonly called The Books of the City of God This is the Account which St. Augustin gives both of the Subject and of the Occasion of these Books in his Retractations Let us now examine more particularly what is most remarkable in each Book for it is a VVork made up of a great variety of very learned and very curious things In the First Book he shews That instead of imputing to the Christians the Desolation and the taking of Rome the Heathen ought rather to ascribe to the special favour of Jesus Christ That the Barbarians only out of reverence to his Name spared all those that had retired into the Churches He pretends That there are no Examples in the VVars of the Heathen to shew That the Enemies who spoiled a Town taken by Storm spared those who took Sanctuary in the Temples of their Gods This puts St. Augustin upon asking why this Favour of God was extended to those Ungodly Men that fled into the Churches who feigned themselves to be Christians and why the good were involved in the same Mischief with the wicked He confesses That both the Good and the Evil Things of this VVorld are common both to Good and Evil Men but the difference consists in the Use which they make of them He observes That perhaps good Men probably are punished with the wicked because they took no care to reprove St. Augustin Iâ—me VII and to correct them and that however good Men lose nothing by losing the good things of this World That a Christian ought to be easily conforted for want of Burial seeing that this doth him neither good nor hurt And he comforteth the Virgins that had been ravished in that disorder shewing That they lost neither the Chastity of the Soul nor the Purity of the Body He excuseth those that killed themselves rather than endure that dishonour But he shews at the same time That this Action so much admired by the Heathen is contrary both to Reason and to the Laws of Nature and that it is never lawful to kill our selves upon any account whatsoever He answers the Examples of some holy Women who threw themselves into the River to escape the Violence of those that would have ravish'd them He saith That they might have been induced to that by
are united in one only Person That there is but one Christ one Son But say they Theodoret in his last Dialogue rejects such Expressions as are consequent upon the Hypostatick Union for he is against the Phrases God hath suffered God is dead God is risen which are most true in the sence of the Orthodox It is then truly said That he opposes at least indirectly the Hypostatick Union But if they consider well Theodoret rejects not these Expressions but in the bad sence that they are capable of and as they understand them of the Divine Nature it self He opposes these Expressions in the Reduplicative sence God hath suffered as God and in the abstract Terms The Divine Nature the Divinity hath suffered But he owns That the Person who hath suffered was God altho' he could not suffer as God but as Man Jesus Christ saith he is not a meer Man he is both God and Man We have often made Profession of it but he hath suffered as Man not as God This is the Doctrine of Theodoret in his Dialogues It is so true that this Work was of Orthodox Principles that the most zealous of his Party found fault that he had cited Theophilus and S. Cyril but had not mentioned Diodorus and Theodorus of Mopsuesta so that â—heodoret was obliged to justifie himself in this point which he did in his 16th Letter to Ireâ—…s wherein he tells us That he did it not because he was not willing to make use of any Witnesses suspected by his Adversaries Also Theodoret alledges that Book in his Letter to Dioscorus as a proof of the purity of his Faith and of the respect that he bore to the Memory of Theophilus and S. Cyril Had he been well advised to quote S. Cyril with so much Commendation if he had opposed his Opinions as Heretical In sum there never were any but Eutychians who have condemned this Work of Theodoret. 'T was by their Craft that Theodosius banished him by his Edict in which he approves the Doctrines and Outrages that Dioscorus and Eutyches had set on foot in the sham Council of Ephesus But the Emperor Marcian revoked that Decree and tho' afterwards they quarrelled with Theodoret upon the Account of the Writings which he composed against S. Cyril yet we never saw him attacked for his Dialogues The 5 Books of Heretical Fables * These Books have been printed alone in â—reek at Rome in 1â—â—8 are a no less Authentick Proof of the Learning than Faith of Theodoret. He composed them sometime after the Council of Chalcedon at the desire of Sporatius an Officer of the Emperor who was Consul in 452. He gives us in 5 Books an Abstract of the Doctrines of the Hereticks to which he opposes in the last an Abridgment of the Orthodox Doctrine of the Church The first Book contains an History of the Heresies which have opposed the Divinity by admitting many first Causes All the Hereticks believed That the Son of God took the Humane Nature in appearance only He begins with Simon and ends with the Manichees In the 2d he speaks of those who did truly acknowledge That there was but one first Cause but make Jesus Christ to pass for a meer Man This Sect of Hereticks begins with Ebion and ends with Marcellus of Ancyra and Photinus The 3d. Book contains the History of those Hereticks who had other Errors such as the Nicolaitans Montanists and Novatians The 4th Book describes the new Heresies of Arius Eunomius and ends with those of Nestorius and Eutyches It is doubted Whether the Chapter which concerns Nestorius where that Heretick is so much inveighed against be really Theodoret's F. Garner believes That it is a forged Piece and brings many plausible Conjectures to prove it He saith first that if we compare what the Author of this Chapter says of Nestorius with what Theodoret hath written of him we shall be convinced that it can't be his for Theodoret hath always excused Nestorius he hath always spoken honourably of him he never condemns him but with regret On the contrary the Author of this Chapter declares himself against him and treats him with all possible Severity If you will believe him Nestorius was an Instrument of the Devil and the scourge of Aegypt he 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of the Divinity and Humanity of the only begoâ—en Son of God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He was an Hypocrite who studied nothing 〈◊〉 to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and get the Affections of the People by a shew of Religion He was 〈◊〉 sooner 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 Power in the Imperâ—al City but he changed the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into a 〈◊〉 Government and abusing his Power by an unbridled Liberty he made known the Iâ—â—iety of his Heart and pronounced publickly horriâ— Blasphemies 〈◊〉 the Son of God In a word he was a Man who had blotted out of his Memory the 〈◊〉 of the Apostles and their Holy Successors Secondly the Author of this Chapter 〈◊〉 contrary to Theodoret not only touching the Doctrine of Nestorius but also about the 〈◊〉 of his Life The Author of this Fragment says That he knows not what was the 〈◊〉 of Nestorius Theodoret knew well that he had been the Scholar of Theodâ—â—us He saith further That Nestorius had changed his Abode before he came to Antioch Theodoret knew that he had lived in the Monastry of S. Euprepius and likewise That he had been baptized at 〈◊〉 He adds That Nestorius had shewn in the beginning of his Episcopacy after what manner he ought to manage himself and speaks of him as a contemptible Man Theodoret on the other side speaks of him always as a very Learned and Holy Personage Thirdly Theodoret having promised That all the Heresies of which he hath spoken in the former Books should be conâ—uted by him in the 5th doth not count the Nestorians among those Hereticks who were in an Error concerning the Incarnation Fourthly this Chapter seems not to be 〈◊〉 Style It is swelling figurative full of aggravations The beginning seems to be nothing to the purpose and disagreeable to the following part of the History Fifthly this Chapter is taken out of the Letter to Sporatius which contains besides this History a long refutation of the Doctrines of Nestoriâ—â— Now this Letter is an evident piece of Forgery for 1. 'T is a Writing which hath no form of a Letter as being without beginning or end 2. Why should Theodoret write a Letter to Sporatius at that time when he dedicated a Book of Heresies to him 3. The Author of this piece directs his Speech to Nestorius but uses the Phrases of S. Gregory Naz. â—4 'T is not Theodoret's Stile 5. 'T is quoted by no ancient Author 'T is then a forged piece from whence in all probability the whole History of Nestorius is taken and put into the Book of Heretical Fables where Theodoret has not spoken of that Heresie Some Person seeing that he ended his Work with the Heresie of Eutyches and that
Vienna The 10th Letter to the Bishops of that Province is about the difference between Hilarius Bishop of Arles and S. Leo. For the full understanding of which we must observe 1. That there had been a Contest a long time between the Bishops of Vienna and the Bishop of Arles about the Rights of the Metropolis in the Province of Vienna 2. That the Council of Taurinum to appease this Quarrel had ordain'd That whosoever of the two could prove that his City was the Civil Metropolis should enjoy the Right of the Ecclesiastical Metropolitan of all the Province but that in the mean while each should have for Suffragans the Bishops which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the Bishop 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bishop 〈◊〉 That the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 which belongs to the Province of Nâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 of that Province 4. That Hilarius Bishop of Arles desitous to maintain the Right of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 given to his 〈◊〉 went 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and light upon a Bishop called 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I 〈◊〉 to a Widow and who had had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 This Bishop went 〈◊〉 Rome and there 〈◊〉 of the Iudgment given against 〈◊〉 by 〈…〉 5. That 〈◊〉 Bishop of Arles followed him and after he had 〈◊〉 the Church of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and S. Pâ—â—l 〈◊〉 pâ—ay to these Apoâ—… there he went to S. Leâ— and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 him not to trouble the Churches He made his Complaints concerning the French Bishops who after they had been deservedly conâ—… in France 〈◊〉 notwithstanding allowed to assist at the Holy Sacrament in the City of 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 desâ—…d 〈…〉 to his Preâ—…sions declaring to him at the same 〈◊〉 That he was not 〈◊〉 to accuse 〈◊〉 â—â—versary but â—…ly to make his Protestations and 〈◊〉 and that did not please 〈◊〉 he would would home as 〈◊〉 really did when he saw That S. Leo called a Synod to bâ—ing the Maâ—… to Tryal 6. That after his Departure S. Lâ—â— absolved and restored him to his See Upon this occasion and in this juncture of Affairs did this Pope write in 445. to the Bishopâ— of the Province of Viâ—â—nâ— this better of which we are speaking He begins with an 〈◊〉 of the Apostolick Seâ— and says That he had been consulted very often by the French Bishops and had disannulled and confirmed their Judiciary Sentences which had been â—â—â—ught to him by appeal He complains That Hiâ—â—ry had disturbed the Peace and Union of the Churches That he had endeavour'd to make the Bishops of the Seven Provinces subject to his Authority without submitting to S. Peter's whom he had resisted and â—essen'd being puff'd up with a Spirit of Pride He 〈◊〉 That having examined the Cause of Celidonius he found him really Innocent of what he was accused and therefore had made void the Sentence which had been given against him which nevertheless he would have ratifâ—ed if what was alledged had been true He speaks afterward of the Cause of another Bishop of the Province of Vienna named Projectus He complains That Hiâ—â—â—y would have ordained in his Place a Person who had been chosen neither by the People nor Clergy nor Nobility He demands why S. Hilary did intermeddle with the Ordinations of another Province He reproves his Departure from Rome and at length declares That he had ordained that Projectus should remain in his See He then commands the Bishops to ordain Canonically in pursuance of the Election of the People or Clergy and that every one of them keep within their own Bounds He condemns Hilary for carrying along with him armed Men in ordaining or driving out Bishops He forbids him the calling of Synods and declares him deprived not only of his Right of Primacy which he had pretended to but also of the Right of Metropolis in the Province of Vienna which he had usâ—â—ped He will not have him ordain and declares him fallen away from the Communion of the Apostolick See He brings here an excellent Rule about Excommunication We must not saith he easily excommunicate any nor ought it to be inflicted upon any at the Humor of every peevish Bishop but we ought to use that Means to punish a great Crime He adds That none may be Excommunicated but the Guilty not they that have no Part in the Action He exhorts the Bishops to whom he wrote to put in execution what he had commanded He makes them take notice That he did not assume to himself the Ordinations of their Churches but preserved them from the Encroachments of Hilary Lastly He forbids them calling a Synod of more than one Province without the Consent of Leontius an Ancient Bishop he doth not tell us of what see but in the Life of Honoratus written by Hilary Bishop of Arles there is one Leontius Bishop of Frejus Forum Julâ—â— a City in Provence spoken of S. Leo by this gives him the Primacy for a Time upon the account of his Age but yet wholly by the Leave and Approbation of the Bishops of France si vobis placet and without diminishing the Rights of the Metropolitans It remains that we observe That neither Hilary Bishop of Arles nor the Bishops of France did give place to S. Leo and that this Pope continued firm to his Opinion although Hilary sent Two Deputies to him to appease him This is evident by the Letter of Auxiliaris Governour of Rome recited by Hâ—noratâ—s in which he tells this Saint That he hath spoken with Pope Leo and Adds In reading this you will be stirr'd for you are always the same and in the same Resolution He advises him to soften his Terms because saith he Roman Ears are tender Upon this account it was that the Pope labouring with all his Might to have his Decrees put in execution obtained an Edict of the Emperor Justinian which he sent after this Letter by which the Emperor declares That the Primacy of the Apostolick See ought not to be lessen'd being built upon the Merits of S. Peter and confirm'd by the Authority of the Councils He blames Hilary Bishop of Arles for having arrogated the Ordinations to himself that did not belong to him and having deposed Bishops unjustly He commands That the Sentence given against him by the Holy See which ought to take place without the Imperial Authority be executed that no Man oppose it and that there be no Disturbances in the Churches for the future He ordains That for ever hereafter neither the French Bishops nor the Bishops of other Provinces shall undertake any thing hereafter without the Authority of the Bishop of Rome That all that he orders shall be acknowledged for a Law and that the Bishops
Solitary Life The Desart is the Temple of God In the Desart God is found The earthly Paradise is the Figure of it Moses saw God in the Desart The People of Israel were delivered by passing through the Desart The Red-Sea opened it self to give them a free Passage into the Desart and afterward closed again to prevent their return from thence In the Desart they were nourished with the Heavenly Food and quenched their Thirst with the miraculous Water In the Desart they received the Law David was preserved in the Desart Elias Elisha and the Prophets dwelt in Desarts Jesus Christ was baptized in the Desart There it was that Angels ministred unto him where he fed 5000 Men. It was upon a Mountain in the Wilderness that his Glory appeared He prayed in the Desart The Saints retired themselves into the Desart The Habitation of Desarts is to be preferr'd before all others there God is more easily found there we converse more familiarly with him there we live more quietly and free from Temptations The Praises of Desarts in general are attended by the particular Commendations of the Desart of Lerins That is a sweet Place full of Fountains over-spread with Herbs abounding with most pleasant Flowers grateful as well to the Eyes as Smell an abode fit for Honoratus who first founded the Monasteries and had Maximus for his Successor blessed Lupus his Brother Vincentius and Reverend Caprasius and many other Holy Old Men who dwelt in separate Cells have made the Life of the Aegyptian Monks to flourish among us Lastly After he hath spoken of their Vertues he congratulates Hilarius That he was return'd again to such a Charming and Delightful Dwelling The Second Work is a * Epistola de contemptu mundi saecularis Philosophiae Dr. Cave Treatise of the Contempt of the World dedicated to his Kinsman called Valerian who was of an Illustrious Family to exhort him to fly from the World He represents to him the two principal Duties incumbent upon Man 1. To know and worship God 2. To take Care of the Salvation of his Soul That these Two Duties are inseparable because no Man can be careful of his Soul unless he worship God nor honour God unless he take care of his Soul That it is more reasonable to be sollicitous for the Safety of our Souls than our Bodies because the Life of the Soul is Eternal whereas the Life of the Body must have an end and for that Reason we must labour in this Life for Eternity That it is easy to obtain the Eternal Happiness which we desire provided that we contemn this miserable Life That the World hath Two principal Attractives to allure us to it Riches and Honour but that we ought to tread them both under our Feet That Riches are ordinarily the Causes of Injustice that they are uncertain that we must necessarily leave them at our Death That Honours are common to the Good and Evil that Fortune hath her flittings and nothing is stable and permanent but true Piety That the true Honours and Riches are celestial That it is impossible to make a serious Reflection upon the shortness of Life and the necessity of Death but we must think that these are not the only good Things for our Salvation That we ought not to follow the Examples of those who lead a worldly Life but to propound to themselves the Lives of them who renounce the World that they may lead a truly Christian Life although they were Persons of Quality and might have enjoyed Honours and Riches S. Clemens S. Greg. Thaumaturgus S. Basil S. Greg. Nazianzen S. Paulinus of Nola S. Hilary Bishop of Arles and Petronius are those whom S. Eucherius propounds to Valerian he mentions the excellent Orators who renounced the Honours which they might have hoped for in the World yet laid aside all their Glory to write for Religion such as Lactantius Minutius Foelix S. Cyprian S. Hilary S. J. Chrysostom and S. Ambrose He propounds to him also the Examples of Holy Kings Lastly He makes use of the whole Frame of Nature and all the Visible World to prove that the only Employment of Man ought to be to honour the Creator of all Things After all these Considerations he discovers to him the Vanity of all Philosophical Knowledge and shews him that there is no true Wisdom taught nor any true Happiness to be found but in the Religion of Jesus Christ. This Writing is dated in the 1085th Year from the first Building of Rome which is the 432. of our common Aera These Two Treatises are written in a Style very Clean and Elegant the Matter is Spiritual and the manner of handling it very agreeable It may be said that these little Books are not inferior in the Politeness and Purity of Language to the Works of those Authors who lived in those Ages when Language was in greater Purity They have been printed distinctly at Antwerp in 1621. This Treatise to Valerian was printed at Basil with Erasmus's Notes who commends it to us as one of the most elegant Pieces of Antiquity anno 1520 and 1531. It was also publish'd by Rosoeidus with Notes at Antwerp 1620. together with the former in the Praise of Solitude which Genebrard put out at Paris 1578. His other Treatises are not so Profitable nor so Elegant as the former by a great deal His Treatise of * De formulis spiritualis intelligentie Cave Spiritual Terms and Phrases directed to Veranus is a Collection of Mystical and Spiritual Reflections upon the Terms and Expressions of Holy Scriptures in which there is very little Solidity His first Book of Instructions contains the Explication of several Questions which he proposes to himself out of the Old and New Testament Some of them are very well resolved and we may find in them some very good Remarks The Second Book contains 1. The Explication of the Hebrew Names 2. The Signification of some Hebrew Terms which are often met withal in the Bible such as Amen Hallâ—… c. 3. The Explication of some special Phrases 4. An Explication of the Names of Nations Cities and Rivers which are not known 5. Of the Hebrew Months and Festivals 6. The Names of Idols 7. The Explication of their Habits and Cloathing 8. Of Birds and Beasts 9. A Comparison of the Jewish Weights and Measures with those of the Greeks and Latins and the Signification of some Greek Names The Usefulness and Worth of this Critical Work may be easily known but the composing of it is very hard S. Eucherius hath not examin'd these Things throughly but contents himself to give the Meaning of every Thing in short without troubling himself to prove them He hath taken the greatest part of what he discourseth of out of several Authors He discusses them very often well enough but he is mistaken in many Places Gennadius makes mention of these Books The Commentaries upon Genesis and the Books of Kings which go under the Name of
a Council at Arles in 475 against these pretended Predestinarians if they made Lucidus to Retract charged Faustus to write against this Error and if they approved his Book afterward in another Council These are Matters of Fact too well confirmed to be called in question but this doth not really prove that there was an Heresie of Predestinarians at that time no more than that these Bishops were Hereticks it only proves that there were then disputes about Grace that as is usual in the heat of Dispute both parties carried things too high and that as those who held the Doctrine of St. Austin not explaining themselves well gave occasion to others to impute Errors to them so these on their side afforded them a cause against them by condemning St. Austin's Opinions It is true that both of them accused each other of Heresie and Error but we must not trust to such sort of Accusations propounded by Persons suspected on both sides For all the Authors who speak of the Heresie of the Predestinarians are much to be suspected as a sufficient proof because they are on the Contrary Party And they that accuse Faustus of Heresie and those of his Party do it only because they opposed some of St. Austin's Principles not regarding that at the time when he Wrote he might do it without being accounted an Heretick and that several Fathers before and after St. Austin have spoken and thought as he did without being accused for Hereticks for it His two Books of Grace and firee-will are written with a great deal of Moderation and Caution He rejects most plainly and sincerely the Errors of Pelagius He acknowledges Original Sin and the necessity of Grace to do well and obtain Salvation He owns that the Free-will is much weakned since the Sin of Adam but he maintains that there remains some slender knowledge of good some seeds of Virtue that we can know and desire to do good with the assistance of Grace and cannot do it without it but that God denies his Grace to no Man That the Labour of Man accompanies this Grace and that he must obey his motions That God knows from all Eternity the Good and Evil which all Men shall do that he foresees all their Actions and the end they will have but he Predestines no Man to Salvation or Damnation He thereupon sets down all the Texts which are alledged for Predestination and Grace and expounds them according to his own Opinions These are the Contents of these two Books which are to say truly an Explication of those Propositions only which are delivered in his Letter to Lucidus Many Orthodox Authors have written and spoken thus and there is nothing in them but may be defended but althô there were something to be reproved he ought not for all that to be used as an Heretick much less be made the Ring-leader of Heresie since there hath not been any thing designed thereupon I will not pursue this History further because we shall have occasion to speak hereafter of the Renovation of these Disputes which were never managed without Noise and Heat And indeed two Reasons seem to make it unavoidable 1. The Subtlety and Depth of these Questions wherein Humane Understanding is easily lost 2. The Consequences which each draw from the Principles of their Adversaries of which some seem to inspire Men with Pride and Presumption and the other to cast them into Negligence and Despair But if we would consult our own Reason a little we shall see on both sides so many Depths Precipices and Rocks as would make us tremble So that it were better and more advantageous to the Church of God and every Christian to live in Peace and Silence and not desire to dive into such impenetrable Secrets to hold that for a certain Maxim that we ought to beg the Divine Assistance continually but at the same time to work out our own Salvation with fear and trembling But 't is time to return to Faustus's Works We have also a Letter to Gratus wherein he confutes the Errors of Nestorius and lays down the manner how the Orthodox should speak concerning the Person of Jesus Christ. We have also a small Tract wherein he Explains how that Son who is begotten of the Father is of the Substance with the Father and Co-Eternal To this he adds an Explication of what he had said in his Letter to Gratus that God did not suffer by the Senses but only by a kind of Compassion The last Question which he treats of in this Writing is of the Nature of the Soul he maintains that it and all Creatures are Corporeal Gennadius hath divided this Treatise into two Parts and speaks of the last as a distinct Treatise This is that which Mamertus endeavours the Confutation of The Letter to 〈◊〉 which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is yet preserved but we have not the Treatise of the Holy 〈◊〉 of which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor another Treatise Composed by way of Dialogue comme 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But we have two discourses to the Monks some other among the 〈◊〉 which bear the 〈◊〉 of Eusebius Emesenus and a Letter to one named 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he answers some Questions which he had proposed to him The first is concerning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of those who are at the point of Death Faustus answers that that is very uncertain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is Whether the Faith in the Trinity be sufficient for Salvation 〈◊〉 answers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it be accompanied with Good Works and althô they have been Baptized yet if they 〈◊〉 one of the three 〈◊〉 Sins Sacriledge Murther and Adultery they shall be Damned Eternally if they do not make an Attonement by Penance The Last is about the Nature of the Soul and Punishments after Death Faustus holds the Soul to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it 〈◊〉 Corporeal and Eternal Punishments but more or less severe according to the greatness of 〈◊〉 He hath also five Letters to Ruricius but they contain nothing remarkable in them The Style of Faustus is plain easie and clear full of Antitheses and Rhymes His Notions and Arguments are very rational and apposite He is full of Spiritual Maxims and Moral Precepts One part of his Works which we have already spoken of was in the Old Bibliotheca Patrum Canisius hath published the Rest. They are all in the last Biblioth Patr. Tom. 8. p. 523. Printed at Lyons RURICIUS DESIDERIUS and some Others WE have a Collection of 64 Letters of Ruricius Bishop of Lemovicum who lived about the end of this Age and dyed at the beginning of the Next of 14 Letters Ruricius Desiderius c. of Desiderius Bishop of Cadurcum and some other Letters Written to these two Bishops by some of their Colleagues but they are Ordinary Letters pleasantly Written which contain nothing remarkable in them We may find them in Canisius and in the last Bibliotheca Patrum Printed at Lyons APOLLINARIS SIDONIUS Bishop of Clermont C. Sollius Ap. Sidonius descended of an Illustrious Family
him wherein he tells that he was grieved to hear that he was angry with him for the Letter which he wrote to the Monks of Aegypt but he ought to consider that it was not that Letter that had raised such disturbances in the Church but the Papers which went about under his Name that had caused so great a Scandal that some Persons would not call Jesus Christ God but the Organ and Instrument of the Divinity that it was this that obliged him to write That he had been sent to from Rome to know who was the Author of those Writings that all the West was in an Uproar about them that he might appease the disturbances by explaining himself and retracting what was attributed to him that he ought not to refuse to give the Virgin Mary the title of the Mother of God because by this means he would restore the Churches Peace This Letter was carried to Nestorius by one of S. Cyril's Priests who was very urgent with him for an answer to it He gave him one but without an Explication of his Doctrine and telling p. 1. c. 7. St. Cyril that though he had acted contrary to the Rules of Brotherly Charity yet he would forget it and did by this Letter give him the tokens of Union and Peace Saint Cyril having informed Nestorius that his Writings were carried as far as Rome and that they met with an unwelcome reception there Nestorius thought it his Duty to write to St. Caelestine about it And to do it the more handsomely he took an Occasion to write to him about four Pelagian Bishops Julian Florus Orontius and Fabius who had fled to Constantinople and had presented their Petitions to the Emperor in which they complained of the ill usage they had received in the West He assures the Pope that he had answered them according to his Office and p. 1. c. 16. Duty although he was not informed of their Case but that he ought to make it clear that they may have no cause to importunt the Emperor and 〈◊〉 him up 〈◊〉 have compassion on them for if it be true that they were Condemned fâ—â— endeavouring to maâ—… a new Sect they deserved no manner of Pity He adds that having found at Constantinople some Persons who corrupted the Orthodox Faith he laboured to recover them by 〈◊〉 means although their Heresie came very near Arius and Apollinarâ—…s for they confounded and mixed the two Natures in Jesus Christ making the Divine Nature to be born of Mary and the Flesh of Jesus Christ to be changed into his Godhead that upon this ground they gave the Virgin the Mother of Christ the Title of the Mother of God that this term although it be improper might be endured upon the account of the Union of the Word with the Manhood if it be not understood of the Divine Nature and if we do not suppose that the Virgin Mary is the Mother of the Word of God which is intollerable He sent this Letter with the Copies of his Sermons by Antiochus Saint Cyril not being satisfied with Nestorius's answer wrote another Letter to him wherein he delivers to him his own and the Churches Doctrine And to gain the greater Credit to his p. 1. c. 3. Explication he grounded it upon the Creed made by the Nicene Council where it is said That the only Son of God begotten of his Father from all Eternity came down from Heaven was made Man suffered rose again from the Dead and is ascended into Heaven He says that we ought to be contented with this Decision and believe that the Word of God was Incarnate and was made Man That he saith not that the Nature of the Word was changed into Flesh nor the Flesh into the Nature of the Word but that the Word was United by an Hypostatick Union to the Manhood insomuch that the same Jesus Christ is both the Son of God and Son of Man yet without any confusion of the Natures That it may not be said that the Virgin hath brought forth a Man into the World into whom the Godhead is since descended but that from the instant of his Conception the Godhead was United to the Manhood insomuch that it may be said that God is born according to the Flesh and in the same sense that he hath suffered and is dead not as though the Word hath suffered in him but because the Body which he assumed hath suffered and was laid in the Sepulchre In fine that it is in this sense that we say that the Virgin is the Mother of God because she brought into the World the Body of Jesus Christ to which the Godhead is Hypostatically United Saint Cyril having thus explain'd himself exhorts Nestorius to embrace these Sentiments that he may preserve the Peace of the Church and an uninterrupted Union among the Bishops This Letter raised the Dispute Nestorius was highly offended and in his answer to it accuses p. 1. c. 9. St. Cyril of putting a false interpretation upon the words of the Council of Nice and broaching several Errors He says that he Explains the Council of Nice ill because this Council doth not say that the Word was born suffered or is Dead but it says this of our Lord Jesus Christ the only Son of God words which equally agree to the Humanity and Divinity He commends St. Cyril for acknowledging the distinction of the two Natures in Jesus Christ but he accuses him of destroying this truth consequentially and making the Godhead passible and mortal He owns the Union of the two Natures but he holds that upon the account of that Union we may not attribute to either of them the Qualities that belong to the other only and he affirms that as often as the Scripture speaks of the Death and Passion of Jesus Christ it appropriates them to the Humane and never to the Divine Nature Lastly He tells him that he hath been surprized by the Clergy infected with the Heresie of the Manichees who were at Constantinople and had been deposed in a Synod for it Upon this occasion it was that the Adherents of Nestorius published the Book which Photius wrote against St. Cyril's Letters to the Monks with another Piece bearing this Title Against those who upon the Account of the Union debase the Godhead of the Son by Deifying the Manhood These Writings were sent to St. Cyril by Buphas Martyrius a Deacon of Alexandria and Saint Cyril's Agent at Constantinople Nevertheless Anastasius the Priest pretended not to disapprove wholly of St. Cyril's Letter to the Monks and alledged this Reason that he confessed in that Letter that no Council had mentioned Act 1. p. c. 12. the term of the Mother of God Saint Cyril being afraid that those of his Party who were at Constantinople should be ensnared by this Artifice wrote a large Letter upon that subject wherein he labours to prove that Nestorius and his party divided Jesus Christ into two Persons He advises them to
Catholick Faith The Council judging Nestorius sufficiently convicted by these Records which they had read pronounced Sentence against him in these words The Most Impious Heretick Nestorius refusing to appear at our Citation and not suffering the Holy Bishops which we sent to him to enter into his House we were obliged to examine his Cause and having convicted him of dispersing and teaching an Impious Doctrine as hath been proved as well by his Letters and other Writings as by the Sermons which he hath Preached in this Metropolis which hath been confirmed by sufficient Testimonies we have been forced according to the Letter of S. Caelestine Bishop of Rome to pronounce against him this heavy Sentence which we cannot do but with grief Our Lord Jesus Christ against whom Nestorius hath Blasphemed declares him by this Synod deprived of his Episcopal Dignity and separated from the Communion of the * Sacradotal or Priestly Episcopal Order So that Nestorius was cited twice in one Day his Cause examined his Letters and Writings read and rejected the Letters and Writings of S. Cyril approved Witnesses heard and the Condemnation of Nestorius pronounced by 200 Bishops or thereabouts at one Session only It is true it lasted a long time for S. Cyril observes in a Letter that they met very early in the Morning and made an end very late by Candle-light The next day the Sentence pronounced against Nestorius by the Synod was signified to him by Sancta Synodus In Epheso coacta Nestorio Novo Judae a Letter from the Council In the Direction of it he is called Another Judas As soon as this was done they wrote in the name of the Synod to the Emperor and Clergy of Constantinople Saint Cyril wrote also in his own Name to the Clergy of Constantinople and Alexandria and sent the Emperor the Acts of the Council Nestorius was not idle on his part but wrote a Letter to the Emperor in his own Name and in the Name of 16 Bishops who signed his Letter that being come to Ephesus according to the Orders of the Emperor to be present at the Council he waited for the Bishops who were to come thither from all parts and particularly for the Bishop of Antioch and the Metropolitans of his Diocese as also for the Bishops that were come out of Italy and Sicily But perceiving that the Aegyptians were very impatient under this delay believing that they did it out of design they had offered to come to the Synod if Count Candidian would cite them to it but he would not do it because he had heard that John Bishop of Antioch and the Eastern Bishops would soon come Nevertheless the Bishops of Aegypt and Asia would hold a Council alone and had filled the City with trouble That Memnon Bishop of this City had granted them the Great Church for this tumultuous Assembly to meet in although he had denied them the Licence to go into S. John's Church He desires the Emperor to give Orders that they be not wronged and abused and that they Celebrate a Lawful Council not allowing any Monk or Lay-man nor any Bishop not Summoned to be present at it but only two of the most Eminent and Learned chosen out of every Province or if he did not think it 〈◊〉 to permit them to return 〈◊〉 again 〈◊〉 Candidian also sent the Emperor a Relation of 〈◊〉 had passed much like the Account Nestorius had given him He also gave the Council Notice that be had written to him and made his Declaration against the meeting of the Council◠and Ordered that they should wait for the arrival of John Bishop of Antioch Five days after the Deposition of Nestorius John Bishop of Antioch and the other Eastern Bishops arrived They were but 26 which being joyned with the 10 Bishops which were with Collect. of Lupus c. 15. 28. Nestorius made but 36 in all if we believe S. Cyril's Relation Nevertheless in the Subscriptions of their Letters we find more than 50 set down by their Names and the Names of their Cities The Council sent some Bishops to meet John Bishop of Antioch and desired him not to Communicate with Nestorius who was deposed But John Bishop of Antioch was so far from harkening to them that as soon as he arrived he held a Council * In his Inn. in the place of his Abode Here Candidian declared that he had done all he could to hinder the Bishops who were assembled with Cyril and Memnon from doing any thing before the coming of the Eastern Bishops That they had required of him that they might read the Emperor's Letters saying They knew not the Emperor's Orders that he had done it against his Will merely to prevent any Sedition but at his departure he had admonished them to do nothing rashly but not having regard to his advise they had done what they pleased after they had driven him out of the Council and refused to hear the Bishops which Nestorius had sent to them He then read the Emperor's Letter and when that was done John Bishop of Antioch demandad if he done any thing more He said That they had Deposed Nestorius and had published and fastened up his Deposition John Bishop of Antioch went on and asked him If it were done regularly if Nestorius were present and Convected or whether he was Condemned without being heard Candidian answered that it was all transacted without Examination and contrary to the Rules Candidian having given this Testimony he went out The Bishops accused Memnon of shutting up the Churches against them and S. Cyril of reviving the Error of Arius and Nestorius in his twelve Chapters Upon this Accusation they pronounce the Sentence of Deposition against S. Cyril and Memnon and Excommunicated all those who had Communion with them till they should confess the Faith of the Council of Nice without adding any thing to it pronouncing Anathema against S. Cyril's Chapters and obeying the Emperor's Orders who Commanded them to examine this Question without tumult and noise This Sentence was signified to the Bishops against whom it was given and because they minded it not they protested against Cyril and Memnon because they still held a Council after they were deposed and contrary to the prohibition of Candidian These Bishops immediately sent the Emperor word by Writing what they had done There were two remarkable Circumstances in this Letter The first That S. Cyril had written to John Bishop of Antioch two days before the beginning of the Synod that he would stay till he came The Second That they could not get thither sooner because of the length and tiresomness of the Voyage which they were forced to make by Land They wrote also to the Clergy Senate and People of Constantinople to the Empresses and to the People of Hierapolis The Relation of Candidian being received at Constantinople first Theodosius ordered that all that had been done by S. Cyril's Synod should be looked upon as Null and Void
against another that he could find no means to reconcile them The Eastern Bishops gave Count John a Letter to send to the Emperor In it they desired that he would 〈◊〉 S. Cyril's 12 Chapters and that he would be contented to have the Nicene Creed without any Additions signed by them They wwrote also to Acacius and sent a Synodical Letter to the Clergy and People of Antioch wherein they bragged that it was reported that all they had done was confirmed by the Emperor's Authority These Letters are in Lupus's Collection Chapt. 17 18 and 19. The Bishops of the Council on their part wrote also to the Emperor to complain of his Sentence and to assure him that they wondered at his Religion who was persuaded that S. Cyril and Memnon had been justly Condemned They told him at the same time that they would not communicate with the Eastern Bishops unless they would condemn Nestorius and earnestly besought him to release S. Cyril and Memnon and that he would get information of the whole affair from Persons unsuspected They wrote also to the Bishops which were at Constantinople and to the Clergy of that Church complaining of the ill Usage they met withal and that they underwent many hardships by being kept at Ephesus Wherefore they desired them to pray the Emperor to free them from that Prison and to remove them to Constantinople or send them home to their own Churches again They represent the sad condition that they were in in the Memoir which they sent to the Abbot Dalmatius Saint Cyril also wrote himself to the Clergy and People of Constantinople and to the three Aegyptian Bishops residing there The Letter of the Council with the Relation was carried by * A trusty Person in the Habit of a Beggar a Beggar in †Which was made of an Hallow Read his Staff this was delivered to Dalmatius who was an Abbot in great reputation for Sanctity who presented it to the Emperor to whom he was well known He also read the Letter of the Council to the People of Constantinople and the People cryed out Anathema to Nestorius The Clergy of Constantinople presented a Petition to the Emperor in the behalf of S. Cyril and Memnon Dalmatius and the Bishops who were at Constantinople gave the Council an Account of what they had done by Letter In fine the Emperor resolved and Ordered That they should send some Bishops of both sides to Constantinople that the Affair might be terminated by the cognizance of the Cause There were eight Deputed by each side On the Councils side Philip a Priest the Pope's Legat with these Bishops Arcadius who was also a Legat for the Holy See Juvenal Bishop of Jerusalem Flavian Bishop of Phillippi Firmus Bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia Theodotus Bishop of Ancyra Acacius Bishop of Melitina and Euoptius Bishop of Ptolemais The Commission which the Council gave them was That they should demand the Restauration of S. Cyril and Memnon and that they should not re unite with John and the Bishops of his Party till they had Subscribed the Condemnation of Nestorius begged Pardon for what they had done and S. Cyril and Memnon were restored With these Instructions the Council gave them a Letter to the Emperor for the justification of S. Cyril and the Council The Eastern Bishops sent also eight Deputies viz. John Bishop of Antioch John Bishop of Damascus Himerius Bishop of Nicomedia Paul Bishop of Emesa Macarius Bishop of Laodicea Apringius Bishop of Chalcis and Theodoret Bishop of Cyrus †Helladius Bishop of Tarsus was perhaps the 8th Bishop for the Eastern They were left at Liberty to act as they saw convenient but they recommended it to them to endeavour to make S. Cyril's twelve Chapters should be rejected as Heretical The Emperor a little after gave a Second Order commanding That Nestorius should withdraw into his Monastry and that Cyril and Memnon should continue in restraint till their Cause was examined The Praefect wrote to Nestorius that he might retire to his Monastry and that he had taken Order that he should be furnished with Carriages Nestorius received this Order with a seeming Joy and told the Praefect That he accounted this Order of the Emperor a Kindness believing nothing more honourable than to be forced to retreat for the defence of Religion but he pray'd him to take effectual care that the Emperor do condemn S. Cyril's Chapters by his Publick Letters This Retirement of Nestorius discovered that there was no hopes of his Restauration as that the Cause of the others was yet dubious The Deputies arrived at Chalcedon about the end of August where they received an Order to stay for they could not come to Constantinople because of the disturbances which the Monks raised From hence the Deputies of the Eastern Bishops sent a Petition to the Emperor wherein they desired that he would not allow any other Confession of Faith but that of the Council of Nice and that he would be Judge of the Contests between them and that they might set down their Reasons on both sides in Writing Or at least if he were not at leisure to examine this affair that he would dismiss all the Bishops to their Dioceses They complained also in this Memoir of the attempts of Juvenal Bishop of Jerusalem upon Phaenicia and Arabia But they said that they would not have any thing done against him for Peace sake and for fear of troubling the Church with Personal Contests The Emperor a little after came to his Country-House near Chalcedon and sent for the Deputies Sept. 4. to him and heard them with an abundance of Patience The Legats for the Eastern Bishops thought they had an Advantage And therefore spake against S. Cyril's Chapters and accused Acacius of having said that the Godhead was passible and did so much by their Insinuations that the Emperor and his Council seemed favourable to them The Bishops of S. Cyril's Party spake more modestly and contented themselves to intreat the Emperor to send for S. Cyril that he may give an Account himself both of his Faith and Conduct The Emperor propounding it to both sides to deliver him their Judgment in Writing the Deputies for the Eastern Bishops said That they had no other Confession of Faith but that of the Nicene Council wherefore they Signed that and presented it to him They wrote all that had passed to the Bishops of their Party who in their Answer shew the great Joy that they had for the good Success they were likely to have telling them that their Adversaries domineered as before Judged Caused sent their Sentences of Deposition every where Ordained Bishops and disturbed the Churches They exhort their Deputies to oppose Novel Opinions courageously and to insist upon the Condemnation of S. Cyril's Chapters They joyned to this Letter a Petition to the Emperor in which they give him thanks for his favourable reception of their Deputies and implore him not to suffer them
had subjected Valentia Tarentasia Geneva and Grenoble to the Bishop of Vienna and left the other Churches under the Jurisdiction of the Bishop of Arles Caesarius was at Rome when this Canon was made as appears by the ninth Letter dated Novemb. 13th in the Year 502. But let us return to the former Letters The third is a Letter of Complement to Patricius Liberius upon the Election of a Bishop of Aquileia It is dated Octob. 15. in the Year 499 but the Date appears to be added this is the first Letter of the fifth Book of Ennodius and it may be that he compos'd it for this Pope The fourth is not a Letter of Symmachus to Laurentius of Milan as the Title supposes but it is the third part of the Rhetorick of Ennodius of Pavia Any one may be satisfy'd by reading it that it was never a Letter The Letter or Memorial of Caesarius Bishop of Arles contains four Requests which he made to Pope Symmachus In the first he remonstrates to him that among the Gaules the Possessions of the Church were easily alienated from whence it came to pass that the Goods design'd for relieving the Necessities of the Poor were daily diminish'd He prays that this Alienation may be wholly forbidden by the Authority of the Holy See except what shall be thought convenient to be given to the Monasteries He requests in the second place that it may be declar'd also that the Judges and Governours of Provinces cannot be appointed until they have been try'd a long time before 3. He desires that it may be forbidden to marry the Widows who have wore a Religious Habit for a long time and the Virgins who have been for many years in Monasteries 4. He requests that care may be taken to hinder all Canvassing and giving of Bribes for obtaining a Bishoprick The Pope answers these Requests in the following Letter of Novemb. 6th which is the fifth and says That altho the Ecclesiastical Canons have provided for these things which he desires yet it is good to renew them 1st Then he forbids the Alienation of the Possessions of the Church by any Contract and upon any pretence whatsoever but yet he allows some part of them to be given to Clergy-men to Monasteries and to Strangers who are in necessity provided always that they shall only enjoy the Profits of them during their Life 2. He threatens those with the rigor of the Canons who endeavour to promote themselves to the Priesthood by promising to give away the Possessions of the Church 3. He ordains that Lay-men shall observe the Times appointed by the Canons before they be promoted to the Priesthood 4. He declares that he abhors those who ravish Widows or Virgins consecrated to God and that he condemns even those who marry them altho they who are married mean well He ordains that such shall be cast ouâ— of the Communion of the Church and he forbids Widows who have liv'd a long while unmarried and Virgins who have been a considerable time in Monasteries to marry 5. He forbids all Sollicitations and Promises which are made for Promotion to a Bishoprick The sixth Letter of Symmachus is his Apology wherein he vindicates himself from the Crimes charg'd upon him by the Emperor Anastasius In it he writes to this Emperor with great boldness and shews him that he ought not to take in ill part his Answer to the Reproaches spoken against him That if he be consider'd in the quality of Roman Emperor he ought to hear patiently the Messages of the People and even of the Barbarians and if he be consider'd as a Christian Prince he ought to hear the voice of the Bishop of the Apostolick See That for his own part he could not dissemble these Calumnies altho he ought to bear with them and that it was even the Interest of the Emperor to have the falshood of them discover'd that the scandal might be remov'd He taketh the whole City of Rome to witness that he was no Manichean and that he had never warp'd from the Faith he had receiv'd in the Church of Rome since he first left Paganism He accuses the Emperor in his turn of being an Eutychian or at least of favouring the Eutychians and communicating with them He reproves him for despising the Authority of the Holy See and of the Bishop who was Successor to St. Peter He maintains that his Dignity is higher than that of the Emperor Let us compare says he to him the Dignity of a Bishop with that of an Emperor There is as great difference between them as between the things of this Earth whereof the latter has the administration and the things of Heaven whereof the former is the Dispenser O Prince you receive Baptism from the Bishop he gives you the Sacraments you desire of him Prayers you wait for his Blessing and you address your self to him that you may be put under Penance In a word you govern the Affairs of Men and he dispenses the Blessings of Heaven Wherefore the Office of a Bishop is at least equal if not superior to yours After this he proposes That as the Emperor would undoubtedly make him lose his Dignity if he could prove the Articles of Accusation alledg'd against him So he should hazard the loss of his if he could not prove it He admonishes him to remember that he is a Man and that he can no ways avoid the discussion of this Cause before the Tribunal of God That 't is true due respect ought to be paid to Secular Powers but then they ought not to be obey'd when they desire such things as are contrary to the Laws of God in fine That if Obedience is due to Superior Powers it is chiefly due to those that are Spiritual Honour God in us says he and we will honour him in you but if you have no respect for God you cannot claim that priviledge from him whose Laws you despise You say adds he that I have Excommunicated you with the Consent of the Senate In this I have done nothing but follow'd the righteous Example of my Predecessors You say that the Senate has evil entreated you If you think that you are abus'd by exhorting you to separate from Hereticks can it be said that you would have treated us well when you would have forc'd us to joyn with Hereticks You say that what Acacius has done does not at all concern you If it be so trouble your self no more about him joyn no more with his followers If you do not this it is not we that Excommunicate you but your self by joyning your self to one that is Excommunicated He concludes with a smart Remonstrance wherein he exhorts the Emperor to return to the Communion of the Holy See and to separate from the Enemies of the Truth and the Church The seventh Letter is the fourteenth Epistle of the eleventh Book of Ennodius's Letters It may be he wrote it in the Pope's Name The eighth Letter of Symmachus is
Consecrate the Churches of the Arians as was done in the East has the same marks of Falshood The Date of the Consuls is false It begins with some Scraps of the Letters of St. Leo and the rest is a hotch-potch of passages out of the second Epistle of St. Paul to the Corinthians according to the Vulgar Version In fine this Letter is contrary to History to Ingenuity and good Sense To History because Anastasius assures us that John perform'd this Embassy to Ingenuity because John should not have undertaken this Negotiation if he had a mind to desire of Justinus that which was contrary to his Trust. In fine It is contrary to good Sense for nothing can be more ridiculous then this Inference I have consecrated the Churches of the Arians in the East under a Christian Emperor who desir'd it Therefore you ought to consecrate them in Italy in spite of an Arian Prince who will be provok'd by so doing utterly to destroy the Catholick Churches A delicate Consequence FELIX the Fourth Bishop of Rome AFter the Death of John the Holy See was vacant for almost two Months and at last Theodoric Felix IV. Bishop of Rome caus'd to be chose in his room Felix the fourth of that Name who continued in the Holy See until the twelfth day of October in the Year 529. There are three Letters which go under the Name of this Pope but the two first are manifestly supposititious being nothing but a Collection of Passages patch'd together out of the Letters of St. Innocent St. Leo St. Gregory and the forged Letters to St. Clement and Damasus The third which is addres'd to Caesarius Bishop of Arles was some time attributed to Felix the Third because of the Name of the Consul Boetius which is found in it altho Caesarius was not yet Bishop under that Consulship But F. Sirmondus has found in a Manuscript the Name of Mavortius instead of that of Boetius which discovers that this Letter is Felix the Fourth's and of the Year 528. There he approves the Canon made by the Bishops of the Gauls wherein it was forbidden to promote a Lay-man to the Priesthood unless he were first tried BONIFACE the Second Bishop of Rome Bonif. II. Bishop of Rome BOniface the second of that Name the first Pope of the Nation of the Goths was promoted to the Holy See under the Reign of King Alaricus on the fourteenth day of October in the Year 529. At the same time one part of the Clergy chose Dioscorus who was formerly one of the Deputies sent into the East by Hormisdas Boniface was Ordain'd in the Church of Julius and Dioscorus in that of Constantine But this last died the twelfth day of November Boniface seeing himself left in sole possession us'd his utmost endeavours to bring over those who had been of the other Party he threatned them with an Anathema and forc'd them to subscribe He call'd together the Clergy and condemn'd the Memory of Dioscorus accusing him of Simony He proceeded yet further and as if it were not enough for him to be secur'd of the Holy See for himself he would also appoint himself a Successor and having call'd a Synod he engag'd the Bishops and Clergy by Oath and under their Hands that they should choose and ordain in his room the Deacon Vigilius after his Death This being against the Canons he himself acknowledg'd publickly his Fault and burnt the Writing which he extorted from them To this Pope there is attributed a Letter to Eulalius Bishop of Alexandria wherein he writes to him that the Bishop of Carthage was re-united to the Church of Rome supposing that he had been separated from it ever since the time of Aurelius But as little as is known of the History of these times this Piece appears to be supposititious For every one knows that Aurelius and his Collegues were always closely united to the Church of Rome and that their Successors did never separate from it Besides that there never was any Eulalius Bishop of Alexandria and that the Impost or who contriv'd this Letter supposes it written under the Empire of Justin who was dead before Boniface was promoted to the Holy See But tho he had not so plainly fail'd in History it were easie to discover his Imposture by observing that this Letter is compos'd of Passages taken out of the Letters of St. Leo Hormisdas and even out of the Letter of St. Gregory who was not promoted to the See of Rome till many years after Boniface This Letter therefore is the Work of an Impostor as well as that Libel of this Eulalius wherein he Excommunicates all his Predecessors and all his Successors and all those who shall infringe the Priviledges of the Roman Church For excepting this impertinent passage the rest of this Writing is taken out of St. Gregory and Hormisdas The Date of the Consuls agrees to a year wherein Boniface was dead The only true Letter of Boniface is that which is address'd to Caesarius of Arles who had written to his Predecessor against the Opinion of some Bishops of the Gauls who said that the beginning of Faith should be attributed to Nature and not to Grace and at the same time had pray'd for the removing of all difficulties that it might be confirm'd by the Authority of the Holy See That Faith and the first Motions of the Will to that which is good were inspir'd by preventing Grace Boniface answers him That it is a manifest Truth that we can neither desire nor begin any Good nor have Faith but by the Grace of Jesus Christ. He commends the Bishops of France who had approved this Doctrine and hopes that others would submit to it This Letter is dated the 25th of January under the Consulship of Lampadius and Orestes in the Year 530. The Date of it shews that Boniface was promoted to the Holy See in the Year 529 and that Felix had the Pontificat a year less then is noted in Anastasius In the Year 531 Boniface held a Council about the Petition of Stephen Bishop of Larissa concerning the Rights of the Popes of Illyricum We shall speak of it hereafter in the Acts of this Council His Epistles are printed Concil Tom. 4. p. 1684. Cave p. 402. JOHN the Second Bishop of Rome JOHN sirnam'd Mercurius a Roman by Nation the Son of Prejectus was Ordain'd Bishop of Rome on the 22th of January in the Year 532 and govern'd this Church two Years and some John II. Bishop of Rome Months Immediately after his Promotion the Emperor Justinian wrote him a Letter which he sent by two Bishops call'd Hypatius and Demetrius wherein after he has testified his Respect for the Holy See he informs him that some Persons would not believe that Jesus Christ the only Son of God who was born of Mary and who was crucified is one of the Persons of the Trinity which gave just cause of Suspicion that they were of Nestorius's Judgment He
St. Gregory 100 R RHeims Vicaracy granted to St. Reâ—â— Archbishop of Rheims by the Pope Hâ—rmisdâ—s 10 Relicks The true Crolâ— 5. Veneration due to Relicks 87. Filings of the Chains of St. Peter and St. Paul ibid. Relicks used in the Consecration of Churches ibid. Their Honour defended by Eulâ—gius 66. They ought not to be put in Chappels where they cannot be honoured 116. Proof of them made by putting them in the fire 160 Repentance and Penance Remission of sins not to be obtained but in this Life and in the Church 15 and in making a true Repentance 16. Repentance useless out of the Church 19. How Remission ought to be demanded and to whom granted 111. True Repentance consists in sinning no morâ— 74. Rules concerning Repentance 156. The Benediction of Penance granted to one on his Death-bed hinders not but that afterwards he must do Penance 115. It is not permitted to the Priest to give the Benediction to the Penitent 112. Those that forsake it punished 113. Death-bed Repentance not useless to all the World but serves nothing to those that return to their Irregularities 4 5. Penance of Clerks for divers sins 74 84 116 127 Clerks fallen into the sin of Incontinence may be restored 118. Those that abandon Penance excommunicated 116 128. Absolution not to berefused to any at Death 117. The Resolution of a Bishop to make a Man do Penance that had abused a young Woman 6 Regulation of the Names of the Clergy of England described by Gildas 64 Ecclesiastical Revenues Use that ought to be made of them 81 92 113 148 Rogatiâ—â—s Institution of Rogations 6. When and how they ought to be celebrated 114 115 Rome The Jurisdiction of the Holy See over Illyrium established 122 Bishop of Rome Primacy of the Church and Bishops of Rome in what it consists 76. Authority of the Pope in Ecclesiastical Judgments ibid. His Authority over the Bishops of the Vicariate 77. Respectful Terms to the Pope 5. He is called Bishop of the Universal Church ibid. He cannot be judged by his Inferiors according to the Opinion of Avitus 5. Priviledges of the Bishops of Rome inviolable 48. Priviledges of the Pope not to be judged by a Council if it be not assembled by his Authority 9. A Paradoxal Proposition that a Pope became holy ibid. Rusticus Deacon of Rome Of his Writings and his Opinions 56 S SAbinus Bishop of Lanusa wrought Miracles 99 Sacrifice of the Altar It is not only offer'd to the Father but to the Word also 15 Schism of the Church of Rome after the Death of Anastasius 1. c. Council of Rome against Schismaticks 108. Another Schism after the death of Felix IV. between Boniface and Dioscorus 30. Another Schism between Silverus and Vigilius 46 Holy Scripture Rules and Critical Reflections upon the Canonical Books 57. Catalogue of the Canonical Books ibid. Severus of Antioch His Ordination and Deposition 132. He divides the Eutychians ibid. Anathematized in the Council under Mennas 133. His Error and his Writings 27 Severus Priest raised one dead 99 Severus Bishop of Malaga Author of a Treatise against Vincent an Arian 104 Sees Apostolick Their Consideration 78 Silverus Pope His Election was made with Freedom 46. His Persecution and Death 47. His Letters supposititious ibid. Simony It is forbidden to take any thing for holy things 161. It is forbid to demand Money for Ordination or other holy things 125 151. It is forbidden in all its parts 82 Slaves Regulation to hinder Christian Slaves from serving Jews 87. Regulation concerning the Christian Slaves belonging to Jews 130. Forbidden to be made Clerks without permission of their Masters ibid. Souls Spiritual Souls 100. State of the Souls after Death ibid. Divers apparitions of Souls ibid. A fabulous History of the Soul of Trajan 102. Question concerning the Original of Souls undecided 18. What we ought to believe of the Nature of the Soul ibid. They act and appear after death 105 Stephen of Larissa Acts of the Council held at Rome upon his Affair 122. Agapetus would that his Cause be instructed by his Legats 31 Another Stephen Accused of Incest and Condemned by the Council of Lyons 117 Symmachus His Ordination 1. Contested by Lawrence ibid. Confirmed ibid. His Letters 2 3. Accused and absolved 2. His Apology 3. Supposititious Letter 3. His Absolution forbidden by Ennodius 8. Councils held upon occasion of this Pope and under him 108 T TEtradius hath written a Rule for Monks 51 Tetradia Wife of Eulalius Count of Auvergne Her History 158 Theft In what manner it ought to be punished 92. Theft in a Clerk punished 111 Theodorus of Mopsuestia His Writings defended 53 Abstracts of his Works alledged against him in the fifth Council 141. Authorities alledg'd against him ibid. Inquest made against him ibid. Accusations and Invectives against his memory 60 Theodorus the Reader His Writings 27 Theodoret. Defence of his Doctrine and his Person 53. Letter attributed to this Author against St. Cyril 142. His Writings defended 146. Concerning an Image of Theodoret carried about with pomp 144 Theodoricus Labours to appease the Schism of Lawrence 1. He names a Visitor to the Church of Rome 2 Theology The true Principles of Divinity 13 Three Chapters By whom and upon what design invented 131. Condemned by Justinian ibid. by a Council 137. Commotions which followed excited by Vigilius 138. Council held at Constantinople upon that occasion 139. Justinian's Letter to the Council against the Three Chapters ibid. The Council send for Vigilius 140. Examin the Question in his absence 141. The Transaction of that Affair 140 c. to 143. Vigilius defends them by Writing 143. Judgment of the fifth Council by which they condemned the Three Chapters 144. Vigilius approves the Condemnation 145. Pelagius pursues the Execution of this Decree ibid. Impartial Judgment upon the whole Affair 145 146. Defence of the Three Chapters by Facundus 53. Defence of the Three Chapters 22. Against the Defenders of the Three Chapters 89. Admonitions to the Bishops of Istria who were separated by reason of the Condemnation of the Three Chapters 65. The Condemnation of the Three Chapters maintained against them ibid. The Bishops of Istria and others Condemned for separating themselves upon the Affair of the Three Chapters 59 Timothy Aelurus His History 132 Traditions The Church hath its Traditions which are not in Scripture 68 Trifolius His Life and Writings 24 Trisagion Addition to the Trisagion 4 34 Trinity Scholastical Explication of this Mystery by Boetius 26. Divinity of the Three Persons of the Trinity 18. If the Three Persons of the Trinity are separable 20. Why we say that the Son Reigns with the Father in the Unity of the Spirit ibid. Rusticus says that it is uncertain if the Holy Ghost from the Son 56. Agnellus assures the contrary 59 Trojanus Bishop of Saintones His Letter 50 V VIctor Capuensis His Writings 55 Victor Turmonensis His Chronicle 58 Vicar Bishop of Rheims made Vicar of Gallia by Pope
he did busie himself about it in the West more than Irene had done in the East In the 15th Chapter he answers this Objection They Honour the Statues Medals and Pictures of Princess why shall they not Honour those of Christ and the Saints He answers it I say by maintaining that the former ought not to be Honoured In the 16th Chapter he answers another Reason of the Council that the Honour of the Image passeth to that which is represented by it He says first of all that he cannot apprehead how a Cloth and some Colours have any Relation to 〈◊〉 St. in Heaven that it is not so with Pictures as with Relicks which have a natural relation to the Saints that it depends upon the Painters Fancy to make folks believe that a Picture represents a Saint or a false God He asks whether those that have most resemblance deserve more Honour than those of a more precious matter He says that if the latter 't is then the matter that they Respect and if the former it seems an unjust thing to prefer them before those that are more valuable Lastly he confesses that the Learn'd may indeed Honour Images without any abuse by referring the Honour not to what they are but to what they signifie but he believes that they can be nothing else but a cause of Offence and a stumbling block to the ignorant who Reverence and Adore nothing but what they see from whence he concludes it 's better quite to Abolish the use of them This shews that the dispute between the Greeks and the French was not so much a dispute about Doctrine as practice In the 17th Ch. he condemns an expression of Constantiu's Bishop of Cyprus but it was badly Translated for whereas that Bishop had said that he Honoured Images and Adored the Trinity he maketh him say that he Honoured Images with the Honour due to the Trinity So it 's an Error of Fact In the following Chapters he reproves the Opinions of some Bishops In the 21st he derides the instance Polemon's of Picture The two next Chapters are against the Praises given to the Art of Painting In the 24th he pretends there 's no comparison to be made between the Relicks of Saints and their Images In the 25th he says That the Miracles done by Images are no Argument that they are to be Adored for then Thorn-Busnes should be Adored because God spake to Moses out of a burning Bush Fringes should be Adored because Jesus Christ healed the Woman with the bloody Flux by the Fringe of his Garment and shadows too because St. Peter's Shadow wrought Miracles In the 26th he Laughs at Theodâ—sius Bishop of Myra who had related his Arch-Deacons Dreams to Authorize Image-Worship In the 30th Ch. he confutes several Proofs alledged by the Cooncil because they were taken of Apocryhal Histories In the 31st He taxeth with Impiety and Folly the Answer of that Abbot who told a Monk it was better to frequent Bawdy-Houses than not to Adore the Images of Jesus Christ and the Virgin In the last Book he goes on to confute some Expressions of the Council and of particular Men in the Council He maintains no wax Candles ought to be Lighted nor Incense to be burnt before Images because they are senseless He cannot endure that the Council should compare those who do not Adore Images to Hereticks He taketh it ill that they should thus abuse their Predecessors confessing nevertheless that these last were to blame for burning and destroying Images He rejects the Story of Christ's Image sent to Abgarus as a mere Fable He makes no great reckoning of another Story of a Monk who had set up a Lamp before an Image which burnt several days He adds that tho' those Miracles were true it would not follow from thence that Images were to be Adored Lastly having deâ—ided them for many of their Arguments he maintains that that Synod was to blame for assuming the Title of Universal because whatever is Universal ought to be conformable to the Tradition and Practice of all the Churches Thus says he if it fall out that the Bishops of two or three Provinces meet together and that according to the Authority of Tradition they Establish some Doctrine or make some Rule agreeable to the Doctrine and Discipline of the Ancient Church what they do is Catholick and their Council may be called Universal because thô it be not composed of the Bishops of all the parts of the World what it does is agreeable to the Faith and Tradition of the whole Church but contrarywise if they go about to Establish some Novelty what they do is not Catholic In a word whatsoever is Ecclesiastical is Catholick and whatsoever is Catholick is Universal all that is Universal is not New Thus the Synod we speak of being contrary to the Sentiments of the Universal Church we cannot own it for Universal These Books were brought to Rome and presented to Pope Adrian by Engilbert Charles's Ambassador The Pope who maintain'd the Council having received them thought himself bound to Answer them by a Writing directed to Charles the Great himself First of all he Vindicates the Expressions of Tarasius and the other Greeks about the Holy Ghost by some passages of the Fathers which have spoken after the same manner supposing those Greeks did not differ from the Roman Church about the Procession of the Holy Ghost Then he defends the passages of the Scripture the Reasons Authorities and Histories alledged by the Synod and censured in the Caroline Books but his Answers are but weak He pretends that St. Gregory taught in his Letter to Secundinus that Images deserved some Worship He cites some passages out of the Fathers upon almost every Article but he maketh such Applications of several of them that very few would approve of and he vindicates some Reasonings that some could hardly Relish But about the end having reported all the Testimonies of St. Gregory he expresseth himself about Image-Worship after a manner which cannot be possibly condemned for he says that Images are not Reverenced but so far forth as they raise up our mind to God and that whosoever Prostrate himself before Christ's Image 't is God whom he Adores that likewise we show our Love and Affection to the Saint by the means of his Images He adds that the Nicene Synod having Established this Doctrine and rejected the false Synod which would have quite abolished Images he had received it as a Legitimate and Catholic Synod that nevertheless he had not yet written an Answer to the Emperor lest he should relaps into the Error of his Predecessors which he fear'd so much the more because writing to him to Exhort him to restore Images he had also demanded of him the Restitution of the Diocesses of the Church of Rome and of the Patrimonies also belonging to it but had received no Answer from him Wherefore he says that if Charles will give him leave in his Answer to the Greek
the Church of Laon the Lands in question and would do him Justice In fine that he had sent him a Writing of that which was done in the Council of Joussi which he never saw and of which the Bishops of that Council never heard and which was not agreeable to the Original he had Lastly he advises him not to Excommunicate Normannus or any others rashly nor go to Rome till 't was examin'd in a Provincial Synod whether his Appeal to the H. See were regular Hincmarus Bishop of Laon returned a long Answer to this Letter of Hincmarus Archbishop of The Bishop of Laon's Answer Reims in which he tells him That he did not desire to enjoy the Revenues of the Church to put them to a bad use but to employ them as the Canons prescribe and that it could not but trouble him much to see the Revenues which were intended for the Subsistance of himself and Clergy to be taken away and given to a Person to whom his Predecessor would never grant a Church-Farm That another had got a Farm granted him which use to furnish the Church with Candles and several others were given to such persons who had done no Service to the Church a long time and could be no ways profitable to it That the King never spake a word to him of that which Hincmarus Archbishop of Reims mentioned to him and that he only told him that he heard he had taken more Grounds in the Lands of Paulls than belonged to him or were granted by the Letters he had sent him That he would have them That he was willing that he should enjoy what was contained in these Letters except the Farms in the possession of Angarius who was his Man upon condition nevertheless that they should restore them to him if he found that they belonged to the Land of Paulls That the King had delayed to restore them to him but he was put upon doing it by the Advice of Hincmarus That he had not unjustly seized upon and kept those Farms but they have belonged above 60 Years to the Land of Paulls That he had enjoyed them ever since the King had restored those Lands six months since till Ansgarius had obtain'd them of the King without any cognizance of the Cause and without examining his Claim As to the Judges which he says were Named by him it is true that the King ordered the Archbishop of Reims to Nominate some Bishops who should examine the Affair of those who complained that they were deprived of their Benefices That Hincmarus having Named them he did appear before them with one Clergy-man and Lay-man of his Church That Regenard having preferred his complaint first he did shew his Reasons why he deprived him and whereas among other things he had accused him of not paying the Service due the Judges required him to take an Oath that it was so and that Regenard should lose his Benefice Whereupon Hincmarus Bishop of Laon complains that the Judges regarded Temporal more than Spiritual Causes because being also accused of spoiling the Farms and having abused the Revenues of the Church they did not condemn him to make any Restitution The second that made his complaint was one Griâ—on who being accused of spoiling a Wood which his Father had Planted he defended himself by saying 'T was not so and that 't was some Peasants that had wasted it against his knowledge and that Hincmarus had deprived him of his Benefice only because he would not go to Rome That when Hincmarus maintained the contrary and produced his Witnesses they put off the Judgment of that Affair till next Week He then confesses that he withdrew himself but says 't was to avoid the Persecution intended against him That all his Family was Banished That they favoured the Lord Normannus who was Excommunicated both by the Pope and himself That they would not permit him to go to Rome but had taken away the Revenues that belong to his Church As to the Constitution of the Synod of Toussi he says that he received it of Harduicus Archbishop of Bisancon who was present at it and that it was written by two of his Deacons and that he remembers well that 't was made in that Council That 't is true that he had composed another Letter but finding it too long he thought it best to Sign this which was shorter and as it were an abridgment of the other Lastly he enlarges upon the Popes Decretals he affirms that they do not contradict one another and that the Bishops who desire to be judged at Rome at the first Examination ought to be sent thither He complains of his Archbishop that he had been no help to him since he desired to be sent thither but on the contrary opposed his Interests This is the Answer that Hincmarus Bishop of Laon gave his Metropolitan but having no mind to have to do with him nor those Ecclesiastical Judges that he had Nominated he resolved to request Secular Judges of the King two months after he retired from Attigni The King appointed Helmingarius Hotarius and Ursio who were Court-Officers These Judges altered and re-examined the things that had been decided by the Ecclesiastical Judges and were more favourable to Hincmarus of Laon than they had been for they made the Lord Normannus to leave his Benefice and others who had gotten possession of the Benefices in contest through the flight of Hincmarus to resign them to him again Things being thus ordered Hincmarus of Laon returned to Court and never spake more of going to Rome Hincmarus Archbishop of Reims was very angry that his Nephew had so well acquitted himself before the Lay-Judges contemning the Authority of his See and the Judges he had appointed A new Contest between Hincmarus of Laon and the King wherefore he wrote to him with a great deal of Passion Nevertheless the Judgment given for him was Executed but not long after Hincmarus of Laon engaged in a fresh Quarrel with King Charles upon the account of Caroloman This happened thus Caroloman the Eldest Son of King Charles was Baptized in the Church of Reims and devoted by his Father to be a Churchman having been Shaved and afterwards received all the Orders as far as a Deacon from the Hands of Hildegarius Bishop of Meaux But because he was forced to embrace a Profession which displeased him he resolved to make his escape and being got away he conspired against his Father He was accused in the Synod of Attigni and condemned as a Rebel and thereupon being deprived of his Abbies was put in Prison Having appealed to Rome the Pope wrote in his favour and a little after he was set at Liberty But in the Year following he began his Quarrel again took Arms gathered Troops and Plundered the Country Hincmarus Archbishop of Reims in the absence of the King who was gone into Burgundy assembled the Bishops of his Province immeately and after he had admonished him four times that he
of Monks and the Shepherds of Souls Or who would not be apt to take them rather for Governours of Cities and Provinces Why tho' the Master be Four Leagues off must his Train of Equipage reach to his very Doors One would take these mighty Preparations for the Subsistence of an Army Or for Provisions to Travel thro' a very large Desert Cannot Wine and Water be pour'd Undefil'd out of the same Cup Cannot a Candle Give Light but in a Gold or Silver Candlestick Cannot you sleep upon any other Bed but one of Tissue Will not one Servant suffice to guide the Horse serve at Table and make the Bed If you tell me it is to save charges in an Inn that you carry so many things then will I ask you why every one does not carry hisown Provisions He also does not spare the Monks in their Buildings But all this says he is little or nothing Let us proceed to matters of greater Consequence and so much the greater as by how much they are more Common I shall not take Notice of the Dimensions of our Churches of their Stately Heighth of their Excessive Length and Superfluous Breadth of their Sumptuous Ornaments and Curious Pictures which attracting the Eyes of the Congregation do not a little I fancy divert their Devotion and which seem to me not much more allowable than the Ceremonies of Ancient Judaism As for my part I would have all Devotion and Places of Worship tend to the Glory of God I would feign Ask the Monks for I am a Monk my self a Question which a Pagan heretofore demanded of Pagans Tell me ye Priests says he what has Gold to do in Holy Places Now I would make use of his Sence tho' not of his words Tell me Poor Souls then say I if you may be call'd Poor Souls what has Gold to do in the Sanctuary I do not speak of Bishops and their Churches for they may take a greater Liberty but I speak of the Churches of Monks We know that Bishops are endebted both to Wise Men and Fools and must be allow'd to stir up Devotion in the People by Images and other such Sensible objects which they could not raise by their Preaching But we that are now no more of the World that have forsaken all the Pleasures and Riches of Life for Jesus Christ his Sake who have cast at our feet all that Glitters in the Eyes of the World and have fled from Concerts of Musick Fragrant smells and Feasting our senses shall we I say Interrupt our Devotion by these Bawbles which we have left for its sake What can we expect if we should Acquiesce in all these Vanities The Admiration of Sots or the satisfaction of Fools Is it not the Commerce we entertain'd with the World that causes us to offer Incense to it's Idols and to speak more plainly Is not Avarice the Cause the very worst of Idolatries Is it not true that we have greater regard to the Peoples Riches than their Salvation If you ask me how comes this to pass I will discover the wonderful Secret to you There is a certain Art to multiply Riches by Exhausting them and like a River to make them encrease while they flow for here Profuseness is the Cause of their Abounding Here the Eyes and minds of the spectators are so seduc'd by these costly Vanities that instead of Offering their Hearts to God they Sacrifice their Purses to Man Thus you may see how Riches swallow up Riches and how the Money of the Monks proves a bait for that of Fools for Men have I know not what Inclinations to throw Water into the Sea and to heap Riches upon those that have 'em in Abundance The Monks cover the Relicks with Rich Artire and the Pilgrim for fear of being dazled approaches them with shut Eyes and an Open Purse The best Adorn'd of these Images are ever the most Holy Men crowd to pay them Devotion but first they must be Consecrated with the Holy Water and after are led to the Image where they for the most part Admire the Ornaments more than the Thing it self Next the Church is hung round not with Crowns of Thorns but Rows of Pearls The Lights of the Lamps are heightned by the Lustre of Diamonds and instead of Candlesticks you see great Branches of Brass mounted whose weight and Work-man-ship are equally to be Admir'd What do you think can be the cause of all these fine things Are they more to put you in mind of your Sins than to move your Admiration No Certainly O Vanity of Vanities But this is not so much a Vanity as Folly The Church shines in its Walls and Suffers in its Poor It covers its stone with costly Garments and leaves its Children the Misfortune of being Naked Here the Eyes of the Rich are fed with the Bread of the Poor The Curiosity of Men is Indulg'd when the Miseries of the Indigent are Neglected Nevertheless if we are Insensible of the Wants of Men we ought to have more respect to the Images of our Saints than to Pave our Churches with them What shame is it for us to Spit in the Mouth of an Angel and Tread on the face of a Saint But all this while if we have an Indifference for the Carving why do we not spare the Beauty of the Painting Why do we paint with our Hands what we intend to deface with our Feet Why do we take so much pains in embellishing what we Intend to defile the next Moment What signify so many fine stroaks when they are immediately to be cover'd with Dust In a word what occasion is there for all these Vanities among Poor Monks who have renounc'd the World unless we have a mind to Answer this Pagan Poet with David Lord I have been all Enflam'd with Zeal for the Honour of thy House and the Tabernacle of thy Glory Well then I Agree with you I consent to these Excesses in the Church the simplicity and Devotion of Prayers may possibly sancitify that that would be a Crime in a Prodigal but in Cloisters to what purpose are those Paintings Cawings before people who weep for their Sins Towards the End of this Treatise he makes an Apologue for what he had said before I hope in God says he that no body will be Offended at what I have writ for I do not question but that in Reproving Vice so severely I have a little grated the Ears of some that Practise it But it may be if God is so pleas'd to have it that even those whom I may be thought to have anger'd may not be so But this cannot possibly happen unless they cease to be what they are unless they cease to Calumniate every day according to Custom to Judge ill of their Brethren by reason they do not visibly lead so austere a Life and if on the contrary those that are less mindful of exteriour Rigour do not take care to retrench all their superfluities Lastly he
that the Apostolick See which had received all power of Jesus Christ for edification and not for destruction should order so horrid and pernicious a thing to humane kind because this would be a manifest Abuse of its Power that therefore one is so far from being obliged to obey such Commands as these that it is ones duty to oppose them tho they were published by an Angel from Heaven and that it is really an Act of Obedience not to receive them and therefore that the Commissaries of the Holy See could do nothing herein against him In one word he concludes That the Power of the Holy See being given only for edification and not destruction and the things hereby ordered tending manifestly to destruction and not edification it was impossible they should be granted by the Holy See This Letter of Robert's related by Matthew Paris being carried to Rome put the Pope in such a passion that he could not forbear expressing himself in very hard Terms if we may believe the above-mentioned Author who makes him speak thus What a doting old deaf impertinent Fellow is this that daresthus rashly and impudently call my Conduct in question By St. Peter and St. Paul were it not for the respect I have for his Ingenuity I would so utterly confound him that he should become the Talk and Astonishment and Example of all the World and should be lookt upon as a Prodigy Is not his Master the King of England who can with the least sign of Ours cast him into prison and cover him with Shame and Infamy Our Vassal or rather Our Slave But the Cardinals says the same Author represented to him how unfitting it was to act any thing against this Bishop that what he said was true and could not be refuted that he was a true Catholick and a very holy Man that he had more Piety and Religion than the best of them that he was of so exemplary a Life that there was not a Prelate of greater merit than he that all the Churches of England and France could bear witness to this that the truth of his Letter which was already no secret might raise the Court of Rome a great many Enemies that he had the name of a great Philosopher a Man well read in Greek and Latin zealous for the Truth and had professed Divinity and preached it with no small Reputation that his Life was blameless and that he was a Persecutor of Simoniacks Upon these accounts they advised the Pope to let it pass and make as if he had never seen the Letter But another English Historian named Henry of Knighton says that the Bishop was excommunicated But let it be how it will he remained steddy to his opinion and died in it on the 9th of October 1523 giving this Character of it to Master John of St. Giles a Dominican that it was a Heresy and an Opinion contrary to Holy Scripture to think that the Cure of Souls might be entrusted with a Child or that the Vices of the great ones were not openly to be reproved He composed many Discourses in which with a great deal of Liberty he checks the Vices and Disorders of the Clergy and some Letters which Mr. Brown has taken care to have printed in the second Volume of Fasciculus Rerum expetendarum printed at London in 1690. There was likewise printed at London in 1652 a Work of this Author 's about legal Observations He made a Commentary upon the Works of St. Dionysius the Areopagite whereof that which belongs to the Book of mystical Divinity was printed at Strasburg in 1502. He likewise translated into Latin the Testament of the twelve Patriarchs printed at Paris in 1549 and in the Bibliotheca Patrum In the Libraries of England there are many other Works of this Author to be met with among the rest A Treatise about Confession another upon Marriage a Work of the Pastoral Care Constitutions about Penance A Work of Piety with this Title The Moral Eye another with this The Doctrine of the Heart A Book of Meditations A Treatise upon the Articles of Faith Another upon the Precepts of the Decalogue c. Letters and Sermons not to speak of his profane Works as his Abridgment of the Sphere printed at Venice in 1508 and his Commentary upon Aristotle's Analyticks printed likewise at Venice in 1504 1537 and 1552. By what we have said of the Life and Writings of this Author it is plain enough what his Genius and Character was and that he had great Learning and Knowledg joined with an ardent Piety and a Zeal for the heat of it perhaps hardly excusable WILLIAM a Native of Auvergne chosen Bishop of Paris in 1228 died in 1240 is one William of the most considerable Authors of this Age for true Knowledg and solid Parts He has sufficiently shewed them both in his Works by keeping close to that which regards Piety and the Conduct of human Life without running out upon Questions of meer speculation This is the Scope to which his Principles tend and the Design which he proposed to himself in the greatest part of his Works The first of which is a Treatise intituled Of Faith and Laws in which after having shewn that the Knowledg of true Religion is the most excellent of all Knowledg and the most useful he demonstrates Faith to be the Foundation of all Religion which consists in the Belief of those things which God hath revealed to us although they be not evident Then he discovers the Causes of Error and Impiety which are 1. The ignorance of the true extent of human Knowledg 2. The distance of it from the things which we ought to believe 3. The subtilty of those things 4. Their height 5. The folly of Men who would fain by the natural Force of their Parts comprehend that which is incomprehensible 6. The want of Proofs 7. The neglect of begging help and necessary assistance of God Then he distinguishes two sorts of Articles of Faith namely those which he calls Radical and Primitive which are the Belief of William of â—aris the Existence of a God and the Trinity of Persons and those which he calls consequential and derivative which comprehend all the Articles of Christian Faith which God has revealed to his Church Then he passes on to Laws and after having spoken of the Law of Nature he with some largeness treats of the Law and Commandments of God in the Old Testament He refutes by the by the Laws and Religion of Mahomet and sets upon the Opinion of those that hold that any one may be saved in his own Law and his own Religion he stoutly encounters the different sorts of Idolatry and passing on to what concerns the Christian Religion he shows the necessity of a new Law and what the Spirit and Worship therein required is This Treatise is followed by a long Work upon the Virtues in which after having spoken of natural Virtues he shows that they are
still put off the Meeting to Munday next being the 2d Day of March In this Session and the five following John the Theologue for the Latins and Mark of Ephesus for the Greeks disputed earnestly concerning the Procession of the Holy Spirit and after they had long contested concerning the Sense of divers Passages of the Greek Fathers each remain'd of his own Opinion without agreeing in any thing The Greek Emperor perceiving plainly That these Disputes were so far from procuring Union that they rather serv'd to exasperate their Spirits call'd his Prelats together to engage them to find out some Temper by means of which an Union might be concluded and he believ'd that he had found out an Expedient by remarking that John the Divine had said That the Father was the sole Cause of the Son and of the Holy Spirit The Greeks having search'd for divers Expedients thought at last they had found one in a Letter of St. Maximus who says That the Latins by affirming that the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Son do not pretend that the Son was the Cause of the Spirit and that they know very well that the Father is the sole Cause of the Son and of the Holy Spirit of the Son by Generation of the Holy Spirit by Procession but they mean only that the Holy Spirit proceeds by the Son because he is of one and the same Essence All the Greeks except Mark of Ephesus and the Archbishop of Heraclea agreed That if the Latins would approve this Letter the Union would easily be concluded The News of this was carried to the Latins who promis'd to give their Answer in the first Conference which was to be held March the 21st The Emperor would not have Mark of Ephesus nor the Archbishop of Heraclea to be there present so that John spoke alone in this Session and in the next which was held the 24th of March. The Greeks were divided among themselves some were Enemies to the Union others on the contrary desir'd it and sought out means to compass it The Emperor supported the latter and desir'd them earnestly to conclude an Union at any price whatsoever He caus'd them therefore to resolve in the Assembly that a Message should be sent to the Pope to tell him That Disputes were useless and they must find out some other way for Union The Pope made answer That the Greeks must acknowledge That the Latins had prov'd very well That the Holy Spirit proceeded from the Son or else they should have brought Testimonies of Scripture expresly contrary to this Doctrin If they did not That an Assembly must be held wherein they must make Oath upon the Gospels to speak the Truth That after this every one should give his Opinion and that Doctrin should be embrac'd which had a Plurality of Voices This Answer being reported to the Emperor he caus'd tell the Pope That this was not the way to procure an Union That this would end in a Dispute and then they must come to a Decision of it which is what they would avoid and therefore they must pray his Holiness to find out some other way In the mean time Bessarion made a Discourse concerning Union wherein he justified the Doctrin of the Latins The Emperor having a Mind to put an end to this Affair held after Easter a Meeting in the Patriarch's House where the Cardinal Julian was present who endeavour'd to persuade the Greeks to resume their Conferences but the Emperor would not hearken to this Proposal and therefore went himself to meet the Pope and agreed with him That Ten Persons should be appointed on each side who should meet and give their Opinion one after another of the Means which they thought convenient for obtaining an Union Bessarion propos'd in the first Conference That the Latins and Greeks should approve the Letter of Maximus to Marinus without any Explication but the Latins gave it a Sense which was not agreeable to the Greeks Mark of Ephesus propos'd after this That the Addition made to the Creed should be struck out others offer'd for a Model the Profession of Faith made by the Patriarch Tarasus wherein 't is said That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father by the Son In fine divers Expedients were propos'd in five Conferences which were held on this Subject but not one of them was agreed upon by both Parties After this the Latins drew up a Profession of Faith wherein they declar'd That they would not admit two Principles or two Causes in the Trinity but one only Principle which is the Action of the Father and of the Son and their Productive Power and that the Holy Spirit did not proceed from the Son as from another Principle or another Cause because there is but one Cause one Root and one Fountain of the Divinity which is the Father That notwithstanding this the Father and Son are two Persons tho' they Act by one and the same Operation and that the Person produc'd of the Substance and Subsistence of the Father and the Son is one That those who say the Holy Spirit proceeds only from the Father must acknowledge that there was a time when the Son was not or else separate the Substance from the Subsistence which is absurd This Profession of Faith was sent to the Greeks by the Latins April the 29th The Greeks not being satisfy'd with it the Latins sent them another which contain'd also the Procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and from the Son yet in such a manner that 't was said the Father was the sole Cause of the Son and of the Holy Spirit The Greeks after this gave one from their side wherein they declar'd That the Father was the Fountain and Root of the Son and of the Holy Spirit and that the Holy Spirit came forth from the Son and was sent by the Son The Latins desir'd they would explain these Terms and that they would tell in what Sense they took them if they meant them of the Eternal and Substantial Procession of the Holy Spirit or only of a Temporal Mission The Greeks made a Difficulty of doing this At last a Profession of Faith was drawn up conceiv'd in these Words We the Latins on one side do Affirm and make Profession That when we say the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son we intend not by this to deny that the Father is the Principle and Fountain of all the Divinity of the Son and of the Holy Spirit or that the Son proceeds from the Father or to admit two Principles and two Productiâ—… of the Holy Spirit but we assert and believe That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and the Son as one sole Principle and by one sole Production And we the Greeks on the other side do acknowledge That the Holy Spirit proceeds from the Father and that he appertains to the Son that he came forth from him and proceeds substantially from these two viz. from the Father
no less an Enemy than the Catholicks themselves but he maintained the Usage of communicating in both kinds which became common in the greatest part of the Churches of Bohemia tho' that Precaution was not observed of advertising the People that there was no Necessity of this Usage The Cardinals Carvasal and Aeneas Sylvius Legats in Bohemia used all their Efforts to abolish this Practice but in vain for Pogebrac and Rocksana maintain'd it which gave occasion to Pope Paul II. to proceed against Pogebrac declare him a Heretick and to give away his Kingdom to Matthias King of Hungary who after he had made War for some time against him made Peace with him and left him in peaceable Possession of his Kingdom in spite of the Emperor and the Pope Altho' Pogebrac and Rocksana had totally ruin'd the Thaborites yet there remain'd many Persons who were tinctur'd with their Principles that separated from the Calixtines and made a new Sect under the Name of The Brethren of Bohemia When they declar'd themselves openly they had for their Captain a Cordwainer named Kelesisky who drew up for them a Form of Faith and for their Pastor one named Matthias Convaldus they re-baptized all those who were admitted into their Sect they explained themselves darkly about the real Presence refused to adore Jesus Christ in the Eucharist and were mortal Enemies to the Clergy and the Roman Church insomuch That they made no great Scruple of joining with the Lutherans and Calvinists as we shall hereafter declare CHAP. VIII An History of the Errors Publish'd and Condemn'd in the Fifteenth Century Chiefly by the Faculty of Theology at Paris all whose Censares are here Related WE shall now give you an Historical Account of the Errors that were Censur'd in the Fifteenth Century by the Sentence given-against John Monteson a Dominican and against those of his Order by the Faculty of Theology at Paris For tho' this Affair was begun in the preceeding Century yet it was not ended till the beginning of this whereof here follows the Relation John Monteson a Catalonian of the Order of Friars-Preachers Doctor of Divinity of the A Censure of the Errors of John Monteson a Friar Preacher Faculty at Paris advanc'd in 1387. many Erroneous Propositions in his Acts De Vesperiis and de Resompta and in his publick Lectures The Faculty of Theology being certainly inform'd of this appointed three Deputies who were Seculars and three who were Regulars to Examine the * i. e. a Parcel of Paper consisting of 3 or 4 sheets Caâ—ire from whence they were extracted but these being unwilling to make their Report unless there were a greater number of Deputies the Faculty appointed Six more who gave their Opinion in Writing whereupon the Faculty being assembled July the 6th of the same year Condemn'd the 14 following Propositions and declared that this Regular ought to retract them 1st That the Hypostatical Union in Jesus Christ is greater than the Union of the three Persons in the Essence of God 2. That it was possible he should be a meer Creature who could merit for himself and all others after the same manner as the Soul of Jesus Christ did by the assistance of habitual Grace tho' it was not at all possible that he could Redeem and Save Man with the same Convenience and Sufficiency as Jesus Christ. 3. That a pure Rational Creature cannot really see the Essence of God as the Blessed do 4. That 't is possible there should be a meer Creature more perfect than the Soul of Jesus Christ as to merit such as was the Grace of the Soul of Jesus Christ. 5. That such a Creature if he were in the World would be above all kinds of Creatures 6. That it is not a Doctrin contrary to the Faith to suppose it absolutely necessary that any Creature should exist 7. That a thing may exist necessarily and yet be produc'd by a Cause 8th That 't is more agreeable to the Faith to say that some other thing is absolutely necessary besides the first Being than to say without Exception that he is the only necessary Being 9th That 't is a Heresie to affirm that a Proposition contrary to Scripture may be true this Proposition is not Condemn'd but only so far as it is meant universally of all Propositions which are contrary to Scripture tho' this contrariety be not evident 10th That it is expresly contrary to Faith to say that every Man except Jesus Christ did not contract the guilt of Original Sin The Faculty Ordain'd that this Proposition should be retracted as false scandalous offensive to Pious Ears and presumptuously advanc'd notwithstanding the probability of the Affirmative in that Question viz. Whether the Blessed Virgin was Conceiv'd in Original Sin The 11th That 't is expresly contrary to Faith to say that the Blessed Virgin Mary Mother of God did not contract the guilt of Original Sin 12th That it was as much contrary to Scripture to say that one Person only was exempt from Original Sin as Jesus Christ was as to except ten 13th That 't is more expresly contrary to Scripture to say that the blessed Virgin was not conceiv'd in Original Sin than to affirm that she was Blessed and Victorious in the Instant of her Conception and Sanctification 14th That in the explication of Holy Scripture whether the Church define a Matter or the Doctors explain it or some exception be deduc'd about it we must not draw any Decision Declaration or Exception but only from the Scripture it self The Faculty declar'd that this Proposition ought to be retracted as false and erroneous if the meaning of it be that the Exposition or Exception ought to be found expresly or explicitly in Scripture and that there are many general Propositions in Scripture which have Exceptions that are not expresly set down therein whereof they give for an Example the following Propositions Every thing which enters into the mouth is cast forth all Men from the highest to the lowest are addicted to Covetousness no Man hath ascended into Heaven but the Son of God who came down from it if we say that we have no Sin we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us The Faculty observes afterwards that this Rule is prejudicial to the Decisions and Usages of the Catholick Church because in the Primitive Church there were many explications of Scripture by Revelation or by the Inspiration of God and by the Information of the Apostles John Monteson was acquainted with this Censure by the Dean of the Faculty and Charitably admonish'd to retract these Propositions but instead of doing it as he had promised he protested that he would defend them till death Then the Faculty of Theology accused him to the University which approv'd the Sentence of the Faculty and presented it to the Bishop of Paris Peter Orgemont who being the ordinary Judge in such Matters order'd John Monteson to be Cited who not appearing he publish'd a Sentence on the 23d
and there are even Manuscripts later than some Editions 3dly The Testimonies which they alledge 4thly The Reasons they bring to establish their Claims 5thly The Answer they give to the Proofs which are offer'd to destroy it SECTION III. An Examination of the Manuscripts of the Book of the Imitation which go under the Name of Thomas a Kempis a Canon-Regular of Zwoll THE first of the contending Parties whom we will hear is Thomas a Kempis whose most probable Title is founded upon a Manuscript of the Imitation which is to be found in the Jesuits House at Antwerp written with his own Hand in 1441. as these Words written at the end of the Manuscript give Reason to believe Finitus completus Anno Domini 1441. per manus fratris Thomae Kemp. in monte S. Agnetis prope Zwol i. e. Being finish'd and compleated in the Year of our Lord 1441. by the Hand of Friar Thomas a Kempis in the Mount of St. Agnes near Zwoll This Manuscript contains the four Books of the Imitation of Jesus Christ under four different Titles The 1st under this Title Useful Advertisements for a Spiritual Life alias Of the Imitation of Jesus Christ. The 2d under this Advices which carry a Man inward The 4th which is transpos'd and plac'd in the room of the 3d under this Title Of the Sacrament of the Altar The 3d which is plac'd last under this Title Of the Interiour Speech of Jesus Christ. And besides these four Books there are some other Treatises of Thomas a Kempis viz. A Treatise of the Discipline of those who are in the Cloyster A Letter of a Devout Person to a Regular A Recommendation of Humility of the Mortified Life the Peaceable Life of good Men Of the Elevation of the Heart A short Advice about External Behaviour Now all these Treatises are without Dispute Thomas a Kempis's from whence it is inferr'd That the four first are also his and so much the rather because if they had been another Author's he would not have fail'd to have set down his Name This Manuscript is Authentick for it is mark'd at the beginning That it is at the Monastery of the Canons-Regular of Mount-saint Agnes a Virgin and Martyr near to Zwoll And afterwards we find written with a later Hand That Friar John Latomus a Regular of the Order of Regulars in the House near Herental Minister-General of this Order having visited the Monastery of St. Agnes near Zwoll had remov'd the Ruins of this Monastery lest it should entirely be lost and carried it to Antwerp where he had left it in 1577. in the hands of his Ancient and Faithful Friend John Beller who had given it in favour of his Children to the F. F. of the Society of Jesus in 1590. Those who maintain That Thomas a Kempis is not the Author of the Book of the Imitation of Jesus Christ Answer That this Manuscript rather favours them than the contrary 1st Because it proves only that Thomas a Kempis is the Transcriber of the Books of Imitation and not that he is the Author of them This is all that is signified by what is set down at the end and the same Observation is to be met with in a Volume of a Bible written by Thomas a Kempis Finished and Compleated in 1439. on the Vigil of St. James by the hands of Friar Thomas a Kempis c. which shows That this is the common and ordinary Form which meer Transcribers us'd to make use of at that time 2dly That tho' this Manuscript be written with the hand of Thomas a Kempis yet it cannot be said That this is the Original of that Book because it is evident and confessed by all the World That there are Manuscripts of the Book of Imitation more ancient than this among the rest a Manuscript of the first Book which ends thus Here ends this Treatise written in the Council of Basil in 1437. and finish'd with the help of God by me Gottingen It cannot therefore be said That this is the Original of Thomas a Kempis's Composition it can be no more than a Copy which he wrote out of his own Works 3dly There are some things in this Manuscript which may make it doubtful whether Thomas a Kempis be the Author of the Book for if he were 't is reasonable to believe That he would not have plac'd the fourth Book in the room of the third he would not have left in it so many Faults such as Omissions particularly at B. 1. ch 13. after this Verse Principiis obsta sero medicina paratur this other Verse necessary for compleating the Sense is omitted Cum mala per longas invaluere Moras and at B. 2. ch 11. Raro invenitur tam spiritualis the Word invenitur is forgotten and gross Faults as at B. 1. ch 12. Non bene nobis creditur for de nobis at B. 2. ch 5. Debes habere for velles habere B. 4. which is the third Book in the printed Copies ch 36. succumbi for succumbere ch 55. stips for stipes or stirps and Words repeated twice and eraz'd If these things be true say they then those who publish'd the Book of the Imitation under the Name of Thomas a Kempis have not in every thing follow'd this Manuscript as they ought to have done if it were certain that this was the last Copy of the Author which ought therefore to be most correct 4thly 'T is pretended That this is not a Proof that the Imitation is Thomas a Kempis's because it is joyn'd to the Works which are ascrib'd to him That there are very often found in one and the same Volume the Works of different Authors and perhaps there may be some cause to doubt whether these other Works which are joyn'd to this are all of them Thomas a Kempis's To the 1st Objection it is reply'd That 't is true it cannot be inferr'd meerly from the Words that are at the end of this Manuscript That it is Thâ—maâ— a Kempis's nay 't is confess'd That in Humility he would not put his Name to this Work That he lov'd rather to pass for the Transcriber than the Author of it but still it is pretended that this being join'd to the other Works which are uncontestably his in one and the same Manuscript all written out with his own hand 't is no ways probable that it should be any other Author's and so much the rather because Thomas a Kempis did not make any Distinction between them and never observ'd that the Imitation was another Author's As to the 2d That 't is not pretended that this Manuscript was the first Original of Thomas a Kempis but that it was only a Copy written out in 1441. of a Work which he compos'd about the Year 1410. As to the 3d 'T is reply'd That an Author who transcribes his own Work may sometimes commit Faults through Inadvertency That the Transposal of the Book is not a Fault since these Books never had any